On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 09:12:28PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 12:49 -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 06, 2013 at 11:56:22AM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > We expect to use the space between the top of option ROMs and the bottom > > > of our own BIOS code as a stack. OVMF was previously marking the whole > > > region from 0xC0000 to 0xFFFFF read-only before invoking our Legacy16Boot > > > method. Read-only stack considered harmful. > > > > > > Version 0.98 of the CSM spec adds the UmaAddress and UmaSize fields, which > > > allow the CSM to specify a memory region that needs to be writable. > > > > > > There exists CONFIG_MALLOC_UPPERMEMORY which we could turn off to use > > > the 9-segment, but that isn't particularly useful for the CSM case > > > either because that memory isn't ours to play with until the final > > > Legacy16Boot call. There's a LowPmmMemory given to use by UEFI to play > > > with, but that's right in the *middle* of low memory and using that for > > > persistent allocations would be painful. So just require > > > CONFIG_MALLOC_UPPERMEMORY when building a CSM. > > > > Hi David, > > > > Are you still looking at this? If I recall correctly, you were going > > to run a test without CONFIG_MALLOC_UPPERMEMORY set. > > That appears to make it boot OK, although I'm still not sure it's > *correct* to be using the 9-segment from the CSM before we've actually > been told to *boot*. Maybe we just get lucky. > > Do you want a version of the patch which doesn't add the dependency on > CONFIG_MALLOC_UPPERMEMORY?
Yes, thanks. We're about to make the next release, but we can put this in for the next release. -Kevin _______________________________________________ SeaBIOS mailing list SeaBIOS@seabios.org http://www.seabios.org/mailman/listinfo/seabios