On 15.10.16 18:57, york sun wrote: > On 10/15/2016 03:03 AM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> The efi loader code has its own memory map, so it needs to be aware where >> the spin tables are located, to ensure that no code writes into those >> regions. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> >> --- >> arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c | 6 ++++++ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c >> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c >> index 1a8321b..facfcca 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/fsl-layerscape/fdt.c >> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ >> */ >> >> #include <common.h> >> +#include <efi_loader.h> >> #include <libfdt.h> >> #include <fdt_support.h> >> #include <phy.h> >> @@ -105,6 +106,11 @@ remove_psci_node: >> >> fdt_add_mem_rsv(blob, (uintptr_t)&secondary_boot_code, >> *boot_code_size); >> +#ifdef CONFIG_EFI_LOADER >> + efi_add_memory_map((uintptr_t)&secondary_boot_code, >> + ALIGN(*boot_code_size, EFI_PAGE_SIZE) >> >> EFI_PAGE_SHIFT, >> + EFI_RESERVED_MEMORY_TYPE, false); >> +#endif >> } >> #endif >> >> > Alex, > > Does it make more sense to use __spin_table instead of > secondary_boot_code (even they happen to have the same value here)?
I'm reasonably indifferent, but I wanted to make sure we're using the same values as the fdt_add_mem_rsv() line above :). Alex _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
