Hi Heinrick, On 24 May 2018 at 13:16, Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de> wrote: > On 05/16/2018 07:15 PM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: >> On 05/16/2018 05:42 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> With sandbox the U-Boot code is not mapped into the sandbox memory range >>> so does not need to be excluded when allocating EFI memory. Update the EFI >>> memory init code to take account of that. >>> >>> Also use mapmem instead of a cast to convert a memory address to a >>> pointer. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >> >> running ./u-boot >> >> bootefi selftest >> Found 0 disks >> WARNING: booting without device tree >> >> Testing EFI API implementation >> >> Number of tests to execute: 17 >> >> Setting up 'block device' >> Setting up 'block device' succeeded >> >> Executing 'block device' >> lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest_block_device.c(378): >> TODO: Wrong volume label 'xxa1', expected 'U-BOOT TEST' >> FAT: Misaligned buffer address (00007ff70aafe658) >> Segmentation fault >> >> Please, fix the alignment fault. You have to ensure that the memory that >> Sandbox has retrieved via malloc is reduced to 4k aligned pages before >> being published to the EFI implementation in lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c > > Hello Simon, > > couldn't we use mmap() instead of malloc() to allocate the memory used > by the Sandbox? This would guarantee page aligned memory. mmap() with > MAP_ANON is available both on POSIX and BSD systems.
We do use mmap() to allocate U-Boot's memory. I wonder why it is not page-aligned? See os_malloc() for the implementation. Perhaps it needs another arg added? Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
