On 18 March 2016 at 13:26, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Mar, at 03:59:42PM, David Daney wrote:
>> From: Ard Biesheuvel
>>
>> There are two problems with the UEFI stub DT memory node removal
>> routine:
>> - it deletes nodes as it traverses
On 18 March 2016 at 13:26, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Mar, at 03:59:42PM, David Daney wrote:
>> From: Ard Biesheuvel
>>
>> There are two problems with the UEFI stub DT memory node removal
>> routine:
>> - it deletes nodes as it traverses the tree, which happens to work
>> but is not
On Fri, 18 Mar, at 01:31:59PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
> Typically, the UEFI memory map is more restrictive, since it does not
> only describe where the memory lives, but also which parts of it the
> firmware has claimed for its own use. So if both memory nodes and the
> UEFI memory map are
On Fri, 18 Mar, at 01:31:59PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>
> Typically, the UEFI memory map is more restrictive, since it does not
> only describe where the memory lives, but also which parts of it the
> firmware has claimed for its own use. So if both memory nodes and the
> UEFI memory map are
On Tue, 08 Mar, at 03:59:42PM, David Daney wrote:
> From: Ard Biesheuvel
>
> There are two problems with the UEFI stub DT memory node removal
> routine:
> - it deletes nodes as it traverses the tree, which happens to work
> but is not supported, as deletion
On Tue, 08 Mar, at 03:59:42PM, David Daney wrote:
> From: Ard Biesheuvel
>
> There are two problems with the UEFI stub DT memory node removal
> routine:
> - it deletes nodes as it traverses the tree, which happens to work
> but is not supported, as deletion invalidates the node iterator;
> -
On 18 March 2016 at 13:56, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar, at 01:31:59PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>> Typically, the UEFI memory map is more restrictive, since it does not
>> only describe where the memory lives, but also which parts of it the
>> firmware has
On 18 March 2016 at 13:56, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar, at 01:31:59PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>
>> Typically, the UEFI memory map is more restrictive, since it does not
>> only describe where the memory lives, but also which parts of it the
>> firmware has claimed for its own use. So if
From: Ard Biesheuvel
There are two problems with the UEFI stub DT memory node removal
routine:
- it deletes nodes as it traverses the tree, which happens to work
but is not supported, as deletion invalidates the node iterator;
- deleting memory nodes entirely may
From: Ard Biesheuvel
There are two problems with the UEFI stub DT memory node removal
routine:
- it deletes nodes as it traverses the tree, which happens to work
but is not supported, as deletion invalidates the node iterator;
- deleting memory nodes entirely may discard annotations in the
10 matches
Mail list logo