linux/arch/x86/include/asm/e820/api.h

54 lines
1.8 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

#ifndef _ASM_E820_API_H
#define _ASM_E820_API_H
#include <asm/e820/types.h>
extern struct e820_table *e820_table;
extern struct e820_table *e820_table_kexec;
x86/boot/e820: Introduce the bootloader provided e820_table_firmware[] table Add the real e820_tabel_firmware[] that will not be modified by the kernel or the EFI boot stub under any circumstance. In addition to that modify the code so that e820_table_firmwarep[] is exposed via sysfs to represent the real firmware memory layout, rather than exposing the e820_table_kexec[] table. This fixes a hibernation bug/warning, which uses e820_table_kexec[] to check RAM layout consistency across hibernation/resume: The suspend kernel: [ 0.000000] e820: update [mem 0x76671018-0x76679457] usable ==> usable The resume kernel: [ 0.000000] e820: update [mem 0x7666f018-0x76677457] usable ==> usable ... [ 15.752088] PM: Using 3 thread(s) for decompression. [ 15.752088] PM: Loading and decompressing image data (471870 pages)... [ 15.764971] Hibernate inconsistent memory map detected! [ 15.770833] PM: Image mismatch: architecture specific data Actually it is safe to restore these pages because E820_TYPE_RAM and E820_TYPE_RESERVED_KERN are treated the same during hibernation, so the original e820 table provided by the bootloader is used for hibernation MD5 fingerprint checking. The side effect is that, this newly introduced variable might increase the kernel size at compile time. Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com> Cc: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2017-07-02 17:07:32 +00:00
extern struct e820_table *e820_table_firmware;
extern unsigned long pci_mem_start;
extern bool e820__mapped_any(u64 start, u64 end, enum e820_type type);
extern bool e820__mapped_all(u64 start, u64 end, enum e820_type type);
x86/boot/e820: Create coherent API function names for E820 range operations We have these three related functions: extern void e820_add_region(u64 start, u64 size, int type); extern u64 e820_update_range(u64 start, u64 size, unsigned old_type, unsigned new_type); extern u64 e820_remove_range(u64 start, u64 size, unsigned old_type, int checktype); But it's not clear from the naming that they are 3 operations based around the same 'memory range' concept. Rename them to better signal this, and move the prototypes next to each other: extern void e820__range_add (u64 start, u64 size, int type); extern u64 e820__range_update(u64 start, u64 size, unsigned old_type, unsigned new_type); extern u64 e820__range_remove(u64 start, u64 size, unsigned old_type, int checktype); Note that this improved organization of the functions shows another problem that was easy to miss before: sometimes the E820 entry type is 'int', sometimes 'unsigned int' - but this will be fixed in a separate patch. No change in functionality. Cc: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Huang, Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2017-01-28 13:19:36 +00:00
extern void e820__range_add (u64 start, u64 size, enum e820_type type);
extern u64 e820__range_update(u64 start, u64 size, enum e820_type old_type, enum e820_type new_type);
extern u64 e820__range_remove(u64 start, u64 size, enum e820_type old_type, bool check_type);
x86/boot/e820: Create coherent API function names for E820 range operations We have these three related functions: extern void e820_add_region(u64 start, u64 size, int type); extern u64 e820_update_range(u64 start, u64 size, unsigned old_type, unsigned new_type); extern u64 e820_remove_range(u64 start, u64 size, unsigned old_type, int checktype); But it's not clear from the naming that they are 3 operations based around the same 'memory range' concept. Rename them to better signal this, and move the prototypes next to each other: extern void e820__range_add (u64 start, u64 size, int type); extern u64 e820__range_update(u64 start, u64 size, unsigned old_type, unsigned new_type); extern u64 e820__range_remove(u64 start, u64 size, unsigned old_type, int checktype); Note that this improved organization of the functions shows another problem that was easy to miss before: sometimes the E820 entry type is 'int', sometimes 'unsigned int' - but this will be fixed in a separate patch. No change in functionality. Cc: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Huang, Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2017-01-28 13:19:36 +00:00
extern void e820__print_table(char *who);
x86/boot/e820: Simplify the e820__update_table() interface The e820__update_table() parameters are pretty complex: arch/x86/include/asm/e820/api.h:extern int e820__update_table(struct e820_entry *biosmap, int max_nr_map, u32 *pnr_map); But 90% of the usage is trivial: arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: if (e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries)) arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries); arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries); arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: if (e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries) < 0) arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: e820__update_table(boot_params.e820_table, ARRAY_SIZE(boot_params.e820_table), &new_nr); arch/x86/kernel/early-quirks.c: e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries); arch/x86/kernel/setup.c: e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries); arch/x86/kernel/setup.c: e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries); arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c: e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries); arch/x86/xen/setup.c: e820__update_table(xen_e820_table.entries, ARRAY_SIZE(xen_e820_table.entries), arch/x86/xen/setup.c: e820__update_table(e820_table->entries, ARRAY_SIZE(e820_table->entries), &e820_table->nr_entries); arch/x86/xen/setup.c: e820__update_table(xen_e820_table.entries, ARRAY_SIZE(xen_e820_table.entries), as it only uses an exiting struct e820_table's entries array, its size and its current number of entries as input and output arguments. Only one use is non-trivial: arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: e820__update_table(boot_params.e820_table, ARRAY_SIZE(boot_params.e820_table), &new_nr); ... which call updates the E820 table in the zeropage in-situ, and the layout there does not match that of 'struct e820_table' (in particular nr_entries is at a different offset, hardcoded by the boot protocol). Simplify all this by introducing a low level __e820__update_table() API that the zeropage update call can use, and simplifying the main e820__update_table() call signature down to: int e820__update_table(struct e820_table *table); This visibly simplifies all the call sites: arch/x86/include/asm/e820/api.h:extern int e820__update_table(struct e820_table *table); arch/x86/include/asm/e820/types.h: * call to e820__update_table() to remove duplicates. The allowance arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: * The return value from e820__update_table() is zero if it arch/x86/kernel/e820.c:int __init e820__update_table(struct e820_table *table) arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: if (e820__update_table(e820_table)) arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: e820__update_table(e820_table_firmware); arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: e820__update_table(e820_table); arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: e820__update_table(e820_table); arch/x86/kernel/e820.c: if (e820__update_table(e820_table) < 0) arch/x86/kernel/early-quirks.c: e820__update_table(e820_table); arch/x86/kernel/setup.c: e820__update_table(e820_table); arch/x86/kernel/setup.c: e820__update_table(e820_table); arch/x86/platform/efi/efi.c: e820__update_table(e820_table); arch/x86/xen/setup.c: e820__update_table(&xen_e820_table); arch/x86/xen/setup.c: e820__update_table(e820_table); arch/x86/xen/setup.c: e820__update_table(&xen_e820_table); No change in functionality. Cc: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Huang, Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2017-01-28 17:00:35 +00:00
extern int e820__update_table(struct e820_table *table);
extern void e820__update_table_print(void);
extern unsigned long e820__end_of_ram_pfn(void);
extern unsigned long e820__end_of_low_ram_pfn(void);
extern u64 e820__memblock_alloc_reserved(u64 size, u64 align);
x86/boot/e820: Rename memblock_x86_fill() to e820__memblock_setup() and improve the explanations So memblock_x86_fill() is another E820 code misnomer: - nothing in its name tells us that it's part of the E820 subsystem ... - The 'fill' wording is ambiguous and doesn't tell us whether it's a single entry or some process - while the _real_ purpose of the function is hidden, which is to do a complete setup of the (platform independent) memblock regions. So rename it accordingly, to e820__memblock_setup(). Also translate this incomprehensible and misleading comment: /* * EFI may have more than 128 entries * We are safe to enable resizing, beause memblock_x86_fill() * is rather later for x86 */ memblock_allow_resize(); The worst aspect of this comment isn't even the sloppy typos, but that it casually mentions a '128' number with no explanation, which makes one lead to the assumption that this is related to the well-known limit of a maximum of 128 E820 entries passed via legacy bootloaders. But no, the _real_ meaning of 128 here is that of the memblock subsystem, which too happens to have a 128 entries limit for very early memblock regions (which is unrelated to E820), via INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS ... So change the comment to a more comprehensible version: /* * The bootstrap memblock region count maximum is 128 entries * (INIT_MEMBLOCK_REGIONS), but EFI might pass us more E820 entries * than that - so allow memblock resizing. * * This is safe, because this call happens pretty late during x86 setup, * so we know about reserved memory regions already. (This is important * so that memblock resizing does no stomp over reserved areas.) */ memblock_allow_resize(); No change in functionality. Cc: Alex Thorlton <athorlton@sgi.com> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> Cc: Huang, Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Cc: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
2017-01-28 10:37:42 +00:00
extern void e820__memblock_setup(void);
extern void e820__reserve_setup_data(void);
extern void e820__finish_early_params(void);
extern void e820__reserve_resources(void);
extern void e820__reserve_resources_late(void);
extern void e820__memory_setup(void);
extern void e820__memory_setup_extended(u64 phys_addr, u32 data_len);
extern char *e820__memory_setup_default(void);
extern void e820__setup_pci_gap(void);
extern void e820__reallocate_tables(void);
extern void e820__register_nosave_regions(unsigned long limit_pfn);
extern int e820__get_entry_type(u64 start, u64 end);
/*
* Returns true iff the specified range [start,end) is completely contained inside
* the ISA region.
*/
static inline bool is_ISA_range(u64 start, u64 end)
{
return start >= ISA_START_ADDRESS && end <= ISA_END_ADDRESS;
}
#endif /* _ASM_E820_API_H */