Re: 2.6.39.1 immediately reboots/resets on EFI system

[Maarten Lankhorst]

Hi Jim,

Op 06-06-11 18:11, Jim Bos schreef:
> On 06/06/2011 05:27 PM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote:
>> Hi Jim,
>>
>> 2011/6/3 Jim Bos <jim876@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>> On 06/03/2011 03:33 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 03:05:26PM +0200, Jim Bos wrote:
>>>>> *,
>>>>>
>>>>> Just applied 2.6.39.1 but my system: 64-bit SLackware, 8GB RAM, MSI mobo
>>>>> P67A-C45 bios V1.9. previously happily booting via EFI (nice to see
>>>>> Linux and the other OS actually NOT overwriting each others boot
>>>>> loaders!) immediately re-booted just after loading the kernel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not even a single message is making it on the console, almost immediate
>>>>> system reset.  As I noticed there are several EFI related patches, I
>>>>> first tried to backout the change to setup.c but that didn't help so
>>>>> backing out all the efi changes in the 2.6.39.1 patch, i.e. the files:
>>>>>  - arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
>>>>>  - arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c
>>>>>  - arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c
>>>>> and sure enough system is booting on 2.6.39.1 with these changes removed.
>>>> Can you try just reverting
>>>>
>>>> "x86, efi: Retain boot service code until after switching to virtual mode"
>>>>
>>>> ? You've got 143 boot services/code regions, which is more than I'd
>>>> tested against, so I'm unsure whether we're overflowing something here.
>>>>
>>> That's seems to be the only EFI patch in 2.6.39.1 and I effectively
>>> removed by =not= applying (skipping) the parts of the 2.6.39.1 patch to
>>> above 3 files.
>>> So yes removing "x86, efi: Retain boot service code until after
>>> switching to virtual mode" indeed fixes the problem for me.
>> Does manually applying commit 9cd2b07c1 fix things for 2.6.39.1?
>> commit is: x86, efi: Consolidate EFI nx control
>>
>> There will be 1 apply  failure, need to change the call to
>> early_mapping_set_exec in early_runtime_code_mapping_set_exec to
>> efi_set_executable.
>>
>> ~Maarten
>>
> Maarten,
>
> Yes that boots, but with the "BUG Bad page state .." as well (so would
> need you other patch).
>
> Jim
So the options are applying that patch + free fix to stable,
or revert the change. Also looking at the comments of the
original patch, it seems it was changed because of Yinghai's comments:
> No, at that point memblock is not used any more. after mm_init()/mem_init()
> need to use free_bootmem_late() in free_efi_boot_services

But that appears to have been incorrect now, seeing that
commit 774ea0bcb27f57b removed that transition

~Maarten
--
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/