Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] x86-64: EFI runtime code

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 08:56:03AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 28.06.11 at 09:39, Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 28/06/2011 08:11, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >>>>> On 27.06.11 at 18:25, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> 
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 11:43:02AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>> This allows Dom0 access to all suitable EFI runtime services. The
> >>> 
> >>> What type of patches for the upstream 3.0 kernel are needed to take
> >>> advantage of these new hypercalls?
> >> 
> >> I did not put any consideration in how to integrate this with the
> >> upstream kernel. For our kernel, I used the *-xen.? mechanism
> >> to have a parallel source file to arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c, and
> >> excluded building of arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_stub_*.S and
> >> arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_*.c.
> >> 
> >> Patch below for reference.
> > 
> > Since the new hypercalls are 1:1 replacements for the EFI run-time calls (I
> > think?)
> 
> Yes, with a few exceptions of things that must not be done from
> Dom0 (i.e. the ResetSystem() and SetVirtualAddressMap() ones).
> 
> > we could perhaps keep most of Linux's EFI subsystem intact and spoof
> > it with a fake operations table containing hypercall stubs.
> 
> Indeed, that part ought to be simple. The question is which of the
> (luckily few) other code paths need adjustment.

And to actually test it to make sure it boots.

How does one go about this? I do have an Intel box that has EFI shell - what
would I need to do?


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel