[U-Boot] [PATCH v4 21/21] efi_loader: Expose U-Boot addresses in memory map for sandbox

[Alexander Graf]

Hi Simon,

> Am 23.06.2018 um 06:01 schrieb Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>:
> 
> Hi Alex,
> 
>> On 18 June 2018 at 09:23, Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de> wrote:
>> We currently expose host addresses in the EFI memory map. That can be
>> bad if we ever want to use sandbox to boot strap a real kernel, because
>> then the kernel would fetch its memory table from our host virtual address
>> map. But to make that use case work, we would need to have full control
>> over the address space the EFI application sees.
>> 
>> So let's expose only U-Boot addresses to the guest until we get to the
>> point of allocation. EFI's allocation functions are fun - they can take
>> U-Boot addresses as input values for hints and return host addresses as
>> allocation results through the same uint64_t * parameter. So we need to
>> be extra careful on what to pass in when.
>> 
>> With this patch I am successfully able to run the efi selftest suite as
>> well as grub.efi on aarch64.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de>
>> ---
>> arch/sandbox/cpu/cpu.c      | 19 -------------------
>> lib/efi_loader/efi_memory.c | 12 ++++++------
>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> Can you please point me to your latest series? I think you have
> decided to work on this yourself and pick bits from my series that you
> like.

Believe me, I also picked things that I don't like. But ultimately sandbox is your court while efi_loader is mine. And I'm fairly sure both of us have better things to do than to run in circles.

> This I consider unpleasant behaviour for a maintainer, but
> ultimately I'm more interested in getting things resolved than any
> procedural issues. Please don't do this to anyone else, though, in the
> U-Boot community.

I don't see the problem - it's pretty common in the Linux world. You propose something, I counterpropose, we converge, maintainer decides what to pick up.

> Anyway, at present I'm not sure what state it is in, so please point
> me to your latest tree so I can take a look and figure out what has
> actually changed from my v9 series.

The current tree with v5 applied is here:

https://github.com/agraf/u-boot/tree/efi-sandbox-v5

Branch efi-next at the same location is the base for v5.


Alex