Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH][GFW][RFC] fix EFI_SAL_SET_VECTORS

[SUZUKI Kazuhiro <kaz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I could not boot the guest HVM when I build gfw with cached physical
addresses. So I changed to uncached addresses.

I confirmed to boot it with your patch.

Thanks,
KAZ

From: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH][GFW][RFC] fix EFI_SAL_SET_VECTORS
Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 18:18:03 +0900

> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 10:43:24AM +0200, tgingold@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > Quoting Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > 
> > > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 12:24:16PM +0200, tgingold@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > > The uncached physical addresses are hard coded, but they aren't
> > > > > relocated when switching to virtual address mode.
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure ConvertPointer is able to deal with uncached addresses.
> > > Anyway,
> > > > using normal addresses should be harmless.
> > >
> > > I guess that the original auther concerned about a race so that
> > > he used uncached addresses.
> > 
> > I don't catch your point.  Uncached addresses won't prevent races.
> 
> No, it doesn't prevent.
> I don't understand why uncached address was used either.
> I had tried to guess the code intention, but I'm not sure.
> Kaz, any comment?
> 
> -- 
> yamahata

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel