Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix boot on efi 32 bit Machines [try #4]

[H. Peter Anvin]

Eric W. Biederman wrote:

> > >
> > You probably don't want to put it in the bootloader.  The kernel is easier to
> > upgrade than the bootloader, which is easier to upgrade than the firmware, so it
> > makes more sense for the kernel to be as self-sufficient as is possible, or at
> > least practical.
>
> Regardless it would be nice if the efi implementation hacks were removed.
>
> My favorite is this one in init/main.c 
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86
> 	if (efi_enabled)
> 		efi_enter_virtual_mode();
> #endif
>
> Which pretty much guarantees efi won't be a distro supported feature
> any time soon because it breaks kexec the ability of a kexec'd kernel
> to boot and thus crash dump support. Or it does if you ever use efi
> callbacks, and if you don't use efi callbacks there is no point in
> calling that function.  Why are efi callbacks not always done in
> physical mode?

If nothing else, they should be isolated, and in the early kernel build 
a datastructure like the e820 data structure, so the downstream kernel 
doesn't deal with it.

I have no idea what the above does; it sounds to me like something that 
should be possible to do differently, though.

	-hpa

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/