On 05/25/2010 03:34 PM, Mike Travis wrote:
H. Peter Anvin wrote:On 05/13/2010 02:55 PM, Mike Travis wrote:Did this last patch meet expectations?I saw that too, and wondered why e820_saved did note820_saved lacks the extra entries because they aren't being passed in
have the extra entries. The comment indicates it
should.
I'm on the system tonight and will investigate this
further.
from the bootloader, as they should, and instead you're using
add_efi_memmap which is, as far as the kernel is concerned, a post-boot
modification.
That being said, add_efi_memmap does come from the firmware, and as such
it would be legitimate for it to add them to e820_saved.
-hpa
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127474230623061&w=4
I'm concerned about calling sanitize_e820_map() on e820_saved; it is
supposed to reflect the raw data as reported by the source, and
sanitizing it would corrupt that.
-hpa