Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:32:32 +0000
From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Cc: Omar Sandoval <osandov@osandov.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com,
        kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kexec regression since 4.9 caused by efi
Message-ID: <20170317133232.GI6261@codeblueprint.co.uk>
References: <20170308201616.GC8598@vader>
 <20170309063806.GB17257@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
 <20170309095408.GA17883@vader>
 <20170313073748.GA6332@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
 <20170316124132.GF6261@codeblueprint.co.uk>
 <20170317020951.GA3942@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170317020951.GA3942@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24+41 (02bc14ed1569) (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 643
Lines: 15

On Fri, 17 Mar, at 10:09:51AM, Dave Young wrote:
> 
> Matt, I think it should be fine although I think the md type checking in
> efi_mem_desc_lookup() is causing confusion and not easy to understand..
 
Could you make that a separate patch if you think of improvements
there?

> How about move the if chunk early like below because it seems no need
> to sanity check the addr + size any more if the md is still RUNTIME?

My original version did as you suggest, but I changed it because we
*really* want to know if someone tries to reserve a range that spans
regions. That would be totally unexpected and a warning about a
potential bug/issue.