Hi Heinrich, On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 at 09:59, Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]> wrote: > > The Sandbox uses an address space that is neither the physical nor the > virtual address space of the operating system. > > In the EFI subsystem we should only use addresses that can be used by an > EFI application. With the patch series we eliminate the Sandbox addresses > from the EFI memory map. > > In the flattened device tree the Sandbox needs its own address space. So > make sure that this is always used here. > > v3: > merge two preexisting patch series > resequence the patches to avoid changes to be undone later > fix the value of fdtcontroladdr on the sandbox > rebase patches > > Heinrich Schuchardt (9): > efi_loader: eliminate sandbox addresses > efi_selftest: add test for memory allocation > efi_selftest: building sandbox with EFI_SELFTEST > efi_loader: macro efi_size_in_pages() > fdt: sandbox: correct use of ${fdtcontroladdr} > fdt_support: fdt reservations on the sandbox > efi_loader: fix memory mapping for sandbox > efi_loader: create fdt reservation before copy > efi_selftest: check fdt is marked as runtime data > > cmd/bootefi.c | 56 ++++---- > common/board_r.c | 3 +- > common/fdt_support.c | 3 +- > include/efi_loader.h | 11 +- > lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c | 15 +- > lib/efi_selftest/Kconfig | 2 +- > lib/efi_selftest/Makefile | 1 + > lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest_memory.c | 187 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > lib/fdtdec.c | 6 +- > test/py/tests/test_efi_selftest.py | 10 +- > 10 files changed, 246 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest_memory.c
I'm holding off on looking at this too closely until my refactor series is in. But the approach looks good to me. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
