grub-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 0/6] Dynamic allocation of memory regions and IBM vTPM v2


From: Stefan Berger
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Dynamic allocation of memory regions and IBM vTPM v2
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 14:47:41 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.1



On 11/24/22 12:56, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,

Adding Sudhakar and Glenn...

On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 02:40:58PM -0300, Diego Domingos wrote:
Hello,

This is an addition to the series sent from Daniel Axtens 
(https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2022-04/msg00064.html).

Patch 'ieee1275: request memory with ibm,client-architecture-support' 
implements vectors 1-4 of client-architecture-support negotiation
However, during some tests, we found this can be a problem if:

- we have more than 64 CPUs
- Hardware Management Console (HMC) is configured to minimum of CPUs >64 (for 
example, min of 200 CPUs)
- Grub needs to request memory.

If vector 5 is not implemented, Power Hypervisor will consider the default 
value for vector 5 and 64 will bet set as the maximum
number of CPUs supported by the OS, causing the machine to fail to init.
Today we support 256 CPUs (max) on Power, so we need to implement vector 5 and 
set the MAX CPUs bits to this value.

The patches 11-15 aren't merged to the grub tree yet, so I'm sending those 
patches again together with my patch to implement vector 5
on top of them.

The patches 11-15 contains the following:

Daniel Axtens (4):
   ieee1275: request memory with ibm,client-architecture-support
   ieee1275: drop len -= 1 quirk in heap_init
   ieee1275: support runtime memory claiming
   [RFC] Add memtool module with memory allocation stress-test

Stefan Berger (1):
   ibmvtpm: Add support for trusted boot using a vTPM 2.0

I went through all patches and cannot see major problems with them.
Though there are a lot of minor things which have to be fixed. Sadly due
to number of them I cannot simply ignore that.

Here is the list of the issues:
   - functions calls/sizeof(): e.g. "grub_printf()" should be replaced with 
"grub_printf ()",
     add space before "(", in the code; though I am OK with the former in 
comments and
     commit messages,
   - casts: e.g. "*(grub_uint32_t *)data" should be replaced with "*(grub_uint32_t 
*) data",
     add space between ")" and "data",
   - s/__attribute__((packed))/GRUB_PACKED/
   - if you use grub_err_t type please test for GRUB_ERR_NONE instead of !err 
or err;
     please do not use plain numbers, e.g. 0 to substitute GRUB_ERR_NONE,
   - if you test pointers for NULL please test using NULL constant instead of 
e.g. !ptr
   - if you use a value often please define constant for it; good candidate for 
such
     change is at least 0x30000000 in the patch #3; if constant definition is 
an overkill
     please comment what given numbers/strings mean or at least where they come 
from,
   - please do not use "//" for comments,
   - I am OK with lines a bit longer than 80; so, please do not wrap
     lines too early,

This is a bit vague but I think I addressed them now.

   - year in the copyright should be 2022.

The GRUB coding style is described here [1] and you can find good
example of coding style in the grub-core/kern/efi/sb.c file.

Please take into account latest comments from Daniel A. and Glenn too.

I don't know how to support the memtool without --enable-mm-debug at the same 
time since the module seems to be missing then but the build system still 
expects it on 'make install'. Unless there's an existing example of how to do 
it I would not post with this patch.

I can get it to create an empty module with this trick here but don't know 
whether this helps the cause.

GRUB_MOD_FINI (memtools)
{
#ifdef MM_DEBUG
  grub_unregister_command (cmd_lsmem);
  grub_unregister_command (cmd_lsfreemem);
  grub_unregister_command (cmd_sba);
#else
  (void) grub_unregister_command;
#endif
}



   stefan


If something is not clear please drop me a line.

Last but not least, sorry for huge delay. I hope I will be able to
review much faster next version of this patch set.

Daniel

[1] https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub-dev/grub-dev.html#Coding-style



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]