[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] arm/efi: Use dom0less configuration when using EFI boot
- To: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
- From: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 16:55:03 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass header.d=arm.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=nrdISgWU1TXTXhiTb6iQpelua/sSvu1oNckl8E8JWC4=; b=kKViQaT65/UgPWnZgT2Q48JB4MAft603iy4m+9hOO/kKRw16eyEM3S15ymxyaLWYPD9ZCdVvTZvHkmwHnIOjc/QMw+73xhJempobgqAe8wEXbRxZ/IkfUP5wj4GfH6eWgeJzMbqe8bgeC31fIv4KjuVCuQtYEZKL09LYK+jcmu/pLNaJu9uQdxs6AxPuHJU7Uz0OcyJSfD3zth200gtt/EcQGlZcN6kFAFNdWn2M07+GGWfVaR5H3nyp+CxTvfpoSu+cHqLOWCnvgR5HwZ6ONH5GBet4biHM/pCN+AaUN7lhzc8JOMRX5hueBE74Na/L+4rZgx5UNPmeUxFkiG+kag==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=n1A8+yPdYaTMnCBS7UOnLBXKFJ5fOLfH1fJ4xwwoUw4CTF2te/pfVq1ozq4Jn2++FWR3oIZHFyGsyXG639eC8S++Mb/n7EfF3p6CthS0CBTmywAESpWjNq7YmVTR5p1GYh+fLtv4i/FmXo1Mesxf2/c/uxbwC5dwY6LLaalKBRxVj7RvytTMNlJnxbJ9dUuZhbosbQfyCBySR0Lad7XI7gjfMx1KCBPI5FqslaSP4MeH6NBZ5BECnpr6h8/YdugPVjKb0vHrRNzNrFNR84KvY8Of2nMtFwzpv4JjEoNpnaFmngWOzICY3iYRk3M3XHGw0KktLNRCc7L2OgF0uNuyjw==
- Authentication-results-original: xen.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;xen.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx>, wei.chen@xxxxxxx, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 15:55:35 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Nodisclaimer: true
- Original-authentication-results: xen.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;xen.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
> On 11 Oct 2021, at 12:32, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Luca,
>
> On 11/10/2021 12:23, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>> On 11 Oct 2021, at 10:39, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Luca,
>>>
>> Hi Julien,
>>> On 11/10/2021 09:03, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>>> +static bool __init is_boot_module(int dt_module_offset)
>>>> +{
>>>> + if ( (fdt_node_check_compatible(fdt, dt_module_offset,
>>>> + "multiboot,kernel") == 0) ||
>>>> + (fdt_node_check_compatible(fdt, dt_module_offset,
>>>> + "multiboot,ramdisk") == 0) ||
>>>> + (fdt_node_check_compatible(fdt, dt_module_offset,
>>>> + "multiboot,device-tree") == 0) )
>>>> + return true;
>>>
>>> A boot module *must* have the compatible "multiboot,module". I would prefer
>>> if we simply check that "multiboot,module" is present.
>>>
>>> This will also make easier to add new boot module in the future.
>> I thought that also the XSM policy was a multiboot,module so I checked
>> explicitly for kernel, ramdisk, device-tree that are supported
>> by domU.
>
> The XSM policy is indeed a multiboot module and should not be used by the
> domU.
>
>> Do you still think that I should check just for multiboot,module instead?
>
> Yes please. I think this is not the EFI stub job to check that the most
> specific compatible is correct.
Ok, I will push the v6 with this change.
Cheers,
Luca
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Julien Grall
|
