diff options
author | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2016-07-21 10:53:52 +0300 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> | 2016-07-21 11:11:57 +0300 |
commit | edce21216a8887bf06ba85ee49a00695e44c4341 (patch) | |
tree | 79c6f03710dbe0dd983715f727691fcf2950309b /arch/x86/kernel/head64.c | |
parent | 4ff5308744f5858e4e49e56a0445e2f8b73e47e0 (diff) | |
download | linux-edce21216a8887bf06ba85ee49a00695e44c4341.tar.xz |
x86/boot: Reorganize and clean up the BIOS area reservation code
So the reserve_ebda_region() code has accumulated a number of
problems over the years that make it really difficult to read
and understand:
- The calculation of 'lowmem' and 'ebda_addr' is an unnecessarily
interleaved mess of first lowmem, then ebda_addr, then lowmem tweaks...
- 'lowmem' here means 'super low mem' - i.e. 16-bit addressable memory. In other
parts of the x86 code 'lowmem' means 32-bit addressable memory... This makes it
super confusing to read.
- It does not help at all that we have various memory range markers, half of which
are 'start of range', half of which are 'end of range' - but this crucial
property is not obvious in the naming at all ... gave me a headache trying to
understand all this.
- Also, the 'ebda_addr' name sucks: it highlights that it's an address (which is
obvious, all values here are addresses!), while it does not highlight that it's
the _start_ of the EBDA region ...
- 'BIOS_LOWMEM_KILOBYTES' says a lot of things, except that this is the only value
that is a pointer to a value, not a memory range address!
- The function name itself is a misnomer: it says 'reserve_ebda_region()' while
its main purpose is to reserve all the firmware ROM typically between 640K and
1MB, while the 'EBDA' part is only a small part of that ...
- Likewise, the paravirt quirk flag name 'ebda_search' is misleading as well: this
too should be about whether to reserve firmware areas in the paravirt case.
- In fact thinking about this as 'end of RAM' is confusing: what this function
*really* wants to reserve is firmware data and code areas! Once the thinking is
inverted from a mixed 'ram' and 'reserved firmware area' notion to a pure
'reserved area' notion everything becomes a lot clearer.
To improve all this rewrite the whole code (without changing the logic):
- Firstly invert the naming from 'lowmem end' to 'BIOS reserved area start'
and propagate this concept through all the variable names and constants.
BIOS_RAM_SIZE_KB_PTR // was: BIOS_LOWMEM_KILOBYTES
BIOS_START_MIN // was: INSANE_CUTOFF
ebda_start // was: ebda_addr
bios_start // was: lowmem
BIOS_START_MAX // was: LOWMEM_CAP
- Then clean up the name of the function itself by renaming it
to reserve_bios_regions() and renaming the ::ebda_search paravirt
flag to ::reserve_bios_regions.
- Fix up all the comments (fix typos), harmonize and simplify their
formulation and remove comments that become unnecessary due to
the much better naming all around.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'arch/x86/kernel/head64.c')
-rw-r--r-- | arch/x86/kernel/head64.c | 2 |
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c index b72fb0b71dd1..99d48e7d2974 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c @@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ void __init x86_64_start_reservations(char *real_mode_data) copy_bootdata(__va(real_mode_data)); x86_early_init_platform_quirks(); - reserve_ebda_region(); + reserve_bios_regions(); switch (boot_params.hdr.hardware_subarch) { case X86_SUBARCH_INTEL_MID: |