On 16.10.2020 02:39, Igor Druzhinin wrote: > ACPI specification contains statements describing memory marked with regular > "ACPI data" type as reclaimable by the guest. Although the guest shouldn't > really do it if it wants kexec or similar functionality to work, there > could still be ambiguities in treating these regions as potentially regular > RAM. > > One such example is SeaBIOS which currently reports "ACPI data" regions as > RAM to the guest in its e801 call. Which it might have the right to do as any > user of this is expected to be ACPI unaware. But a QEMU bootloader later seems > to ignore that fact and is instead using e801 to find a place for initrd which > causes the tables to be erased. While arguably QEMU bootloader or SeaBIOS need > to be fixed / improved here, that is just one example of the potential > problems > from using a reclaimable memory type. > > Flip the type to "ACPI NVS" which doesn't have this ambiguity in it and is > described by the spec as non-reclaimable (so cannot ever be treated like RAM). > > Signed-off-by: Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhi...@citrix.com>
Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
