* Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote:
> > If we allocate the EFI runtime as a single virtual memory block then issues
> > like rounding between sections does not even come up as a problem: we map
> > the
> > original offsets and sizes byte by byte.
>
> Well, by that reasoning, we should not call SetVirtualAddressMap() in the
> first
> place, and just use the 1:1 mapping UEFI uses natively. This is more than
> feasible on arm64, and I actually fought hard against using
> SetVirtualAddressMap() at all, but I was overruled by others. I think this is
> also trivially possible on X64, since the 1:1 mapping is already active
> alongside the VA mapping.
Could we please re-list all the arguments pro and contra of 1:1 physical
mappings,
in a post that also explains the background so that more people can chime in,
not
just people versed in EFI internals? It's very much possible that a bad
decision
was made.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
