Re: [PATCHv3] x86: EFI stub support for large memory maps

2013-09-30 Thread Matt Fleming
On Fri, 27 Sep, at 05:46:07PM, Linn Crosetto wrote: Given that we have already successfully called exit_boot_services, can we still make this call to free_pool? Urgh, good point. The answer is no, not really. I'll add your change verbatim and push out the 'next' branch again. -- Matt

[GIT PULL] EFI changes

2013-09-30 Thread Matt Fleming
Hi, These changes are targetted for the next merge window. Is it possible to get them into linux-next for some vigorous testing? The pending ARM EFI boot stub patches from Roy Franz depend on the x86 EFI boot stub cleanups included in this pull request. The following changes since commit

Re: [GIT PULL] EFI changes

2013-09-30 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 09/30/2013 03:49 AM, Matt Fleming wrote: Hi, These changes are targetted for the next merge window. Is it possible to get them into linux-next for some vigorous testing? The pending ARM EFI boot stub patches from Roy Franz depend on the x86 EFI boot stub cleanups included in this pull

Re: [PATCH -v2] EFI: Runtime services virtual mapping

2013-09-30 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:12:42AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: If we choose this approach, can we save not only the efi_mapping, but also the fields which will be converted to virt addr, like fw_vendor, runtime, tables? During my test on a HP workstation, the config table item (SMBIOS) also is

Re: [PATCH -v2] EFI: Runtime services virtual mapping

2013-09-30 Thread Vivek Goyal
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:17:30PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:12:42AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: If we choose this approach, can we save not only the efi_mapping, but also the fields which will be converted to virt addr, like fw_vendor, runtime, tables? During my