mbox

[GIT,PULL] UEFI support for 32-bit ARM

Message ID CAKv+Gu8sJdNd4FK2sycCFuQ2c4NC6Gy-a3CJ13NiV69sMqVkzQ@mail.gmail.com
State New
Headers show

Pull-request

git://git.linaro.org/people/ard.biesheuvel/linux-arm.git

Message

Ard Biesheuvel Dec. 22, 2015, 12:51 p.m. UTC 
On 22 December 2015 at 13:36, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 06:10:12PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
[..]
>> The following changes since commit f7d924894265794f447ea799dd853400749b5a22:
>>
>>   arm64/efi: refactor EFI init and runtime code for reuse by 32-bit ARM
>>   (2015-12-09 16:57:23 +0000)
>>
>> are available in the git repository at:
>>
>>   git://git.linaro.org/people/ard.biesheuvel/linux-arm.git \
>>   tags/arm32-efi-for-v4.5
>>
>> for you to fetch changes up to 81a0bc39ea1960bbf8ece6a895d7cfd2d9efa28a:
>>
>>   ARM: add UEFI stub support (2015-12-14 10:38:21 +0100)
>>
[..]
>
> This pull request done in this way makes it _really_ difficult to
> validate that I've pulled what was intended to be pulled.
>
> The point of the diffstat is to be able to compare the resulting
> diffstat from pulling the changes with the one in the message.  In
> this case, because you've omitted some patches at the beginning of
> the series, it doesn't match:
>
>  29 files changed, 986 insertions(+), 368 deletions(-)
>
> So I can't validate it.
>
> Please send a replacement pull request which covers all the patches
> you want me to merge into my tree, thanks.
>

The following changes since commit 31ade3b83e1821da5fbb2f11b5b3d4ab2ec39db8:

  Linux 4.4-rc3 (2015-11-29 18:58:26 -0800)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://git.linaro.org/people/ard.biesheuvel/linux-arm.git
  tags/arm32-efi-for-v4.5

for you to fetch changes up to 81a0bc39ea1960bbf8ece6a895d7cfd2d9efa28a:

  ARM: add UEFI stub support (2015-12-14 10:38:21 +0100)

----------------------------------------------------------------
This implements UEFI kernel support for 32-bit ARM, based on the existing
arm64 support and existing generic early ioremap support. It is based on
commit f7d924894265 ("arm64/efi: refactor EFI init and runtime code for
reuse by 32-bit ARM"), which was pulled from the arm64 repo [1] as branch
'aarch64/efi'

[1] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/arm64/linux.git

----------------------------------------------------------------
Ard Biesheuvel (12):
      mm/memblock: add MEMBLOCK_NOMAP attribute to memblock memory table
      arm64: only consider memblocks with NOMAP cleared for linear mapping
      arm64/efi: mark UEFI reserved regions as MEMBLOCK_NOMAP
      arm64/efi: split off EFI init and runtime code for reuse by 32-bit ARM
      arm64/efi: refactor EFI init and runtime code for reuse by 32-bit ARM
      ARM: add support for generic early_ioremap/early_memremap
      ARM: split off core mapping logic from create_mapping
      ARM: factor out allocation routine from __create_mapping()
      ARM: add support for non-global kernel mappings
      ARM: implement create_mapping_late() for EFI use
      ARM: only consider memblocks with NOMAP cleared for linear mapping
      ARM: wire up UEFI init and runtime support

Roy Franz (1):
      ARM: add UEFI stub support

 arch/arm/Kconfig                          |  20 ++
 arch/arm/boot/compressed/Makefile         |   4 +-
 arch/arm/boot/compressed/efi-header.S     | 130 ++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/compressed/head.S           |  54 ++++-
 arch/arm/boot/compressed/vmlinux.lds.S    |   7 +
 arch/arm/include/asm/Kbuild               |   1 +
 arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h                |  83 ++++++++
 arch/arm/include/asm/fixmap.h             |  29 ++-
 arch/arm/include/asm/mach/map.h           |   2 +
 arch/arm/include/asm/mmu_context.h        |   2 +-
 arch/arm/kernel/Makefile                  |   1 +
 arch/arm/kernel/efi.c                     |  38 ++++
 arch/arm/kernel/setup.c                   |  10 +-
 arch/arm/mm/init.c                        |   5 +-
 arch/arm/mm/ioremap.c                     |   9 +
 arch/arm/mm/mmu.c                         | 128 ++++++++----
 arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h              |   9 +
 arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c                   | 334 ++----------------------------
 arch/arm64/mm/init.c                      |   2 +-
 arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c                       |   2 +
 drivers/firmware/efi/Makefile             |   4 +
 drivers/firmware/efi/arm-init.c           | 209 +++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c        | 135 ++++++++++++
 drivers/firmware/efi/efi.c                |   2 +
 drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/Makefile     |   9 +
 drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/arm-stub.c   |   4 +-
 drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/arm32-stub.c |  85 ++++++++
 include/linux/memblock.h                  |   8 +
 mm/memblock.c                             |  28 +++
 29 files changed, 986 insertions(+), 368 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/compressed/efi-header.S
 create mode 100644 arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h
 create mode 100644 arch/arm/kernel/efi.c
 create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/efi/arm-init.c
 create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/efi/arm-runtime.c
 create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/arm32-stub.c

Comments

Russell King - ARM Linux Dec. 22, 2015, 12:54 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 01:51:23PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>  29 files changed, 986 insertions(+), 368 deletions(-)

Thanks, that now matches.
Ard Biesheuvel Dec. 29, 2015, 7:40 a.m. UTC | #2 
On 22 December 2015 at 13:54, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 01:51:23PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>  29 files changed, 986 insertions(+), 368 deletions(-)
>
> Thanks, that now matches.
>

I suppose the fact that none of this has turned up in -next implies
that it will not make v4.5?
Perfectly fine by me, as long as it is in the pipeline and hasn't
fallen between the cracks. Or if there are any remaining concerns,
please let me know.

Thanks,
Ard.
Russell King - ARM Linux Jan. 2, 2016, 12:04 p.m. UTC | #3 
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 08:40:33AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 22 December 2015 at 13:54, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 01:51:23PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>  29 files changed, 986 insertions(+), 368 deletions(-)
> >
> > Thanks, that now matches.
> >
> 
> I suppose the fact that none of this has turned up in -next implies
> that it will not make v4.5?

I pulled it into my devel-testing branch on 22nd, which is the
pre-cursor to it appearing in devel-stable (devel-stable is for
stuff which has passed my testing.)  I never got around to
merging it into devel-stable prior to the Christmas break.

I suspect even if I did publish it, we'd find that -next wouldn't
have picked it up - just before I took a break, I merged the PL011
changes which would conflict with those which GregKH incorrectly
picked up, and I know that linux-next hasn't reported any conflicts.
Ergo, linux-next has taken a break over the christmas period as well.

If Linus decides to do -rc8 tomorrow, I'll merge it into devel-stable
and it'll appear in -next.

Even if I merge it into my for-next branch _now_, it won't appear in
-next prior to Monday, and so if Sunday sees the release of v4.4, it
won't have been in -next prior to the merge window, and will be dodgy
to send to Linus (Linus sometimes compares what he merges against
linux-next.)

So... I'll decide on Monday what to do.