Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Increase portability though existing Info trait #228

Merged

Conversation

rbradford
Copy link
Member

  • bootinfo: Use Option for address of RSDP
  • coreboot: Make module inclusion architecture specific
  • fdt: Make available the guest FDT table if necessary
  • bootinfo: Reduce hardcoding of load address for kernel
  • bootinfo: Include reference to memory layout

This is a nicer conditional check for the presence of the RSDP vs
relying on zero.

Further by storing the address in the FDT struct it the architecture
specific code in the FDT boot info can be removed.

Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <[email protected]>
The code in this module is implicitly x86-64 specific.

Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <[email protected]>
Some architectures still require the guest FDT table for booting the
kernel.

Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <[email protected]>
For the FDT case this is chosen by the architecture otherwise it uses
the common x86-64 version.

This removes the number of locations this is hardcoded and reduces
architectural dependent code in the EFI execution path.

Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <[email protected]>
By including a reference to the memory layout in the Info trait we can
remove the need to hardcode the memory layout in the EFI execution code
making it more portable.

Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <[email protected]>
@rbradford rbradford requested a review from retrage March 10, 2023 16:54
Copy link
Contributor

@retrage retrage left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks good to me!

@rbradford rbradford merged commit 3351c1d into cloud-hypervisor:main Mar 11, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants