Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64/efi: Don't pad between EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME regions

From: Dave Young
Date: Tue Sep 29 2015 - 05:31:27 EST

On 09/27/15 at 12:40pm, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 09:06:44AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Could we please re-list all the arguments pro and contra of 1:1 physical mappings,
> > in a post that also explains the background so that more people can chime in, not
> > just people versed in EFI internals? It's very much possible that a bad decision
> > was made.
> The main reason why we did the additional, top-down mapping was kexec
> kernel wanting to use UEFI runtime facilities too and the braindead
> design of SetVirtualAddressMap() being callable only once per system
> boot. So we had to have stable mappings which are valid in the kexec-ed
> kernel too.
> But this was long time ago and I most certainly have forgotten all the
> details.
> And now I'm wondering why didn't we do the 1:1 thing and rebuild the
> exact same EFI pagetable in the kexec-ed kernel? Because when we do
> an EFI call, we switch to the special pagetable so why didn't we make
> the kexec-ed kernel rebuild the 1:1 pagetable which it can use for EFI
> calls...
> Hmm, again, I've forgotten a lot of details so I'm sure Matt will come
> in and say "No, you can't do that because..."

And more replies here:

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at