Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Feb 2023 13:18:37 -0500 | From | "Michael S. Tsirkin" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86: temporarily remove all attempts to provide setup_data |
| |
On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 03:14:38PM -0300, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 3:13 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 03:08:35PM -0300, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > All attempts at providing setup_data have been made as an iteration on > > > whatever was there before, stretching back to the original > > > implementation used for DTBs that [mis]used the kernel image itself. > > > We've now had a dozen rounds of bugs and hacks, and the result is > > > turning into a pile of unmaintainable and increasingly brittle hacks. > > > > > > Let's just rip out all the madness and start over. We can re-architect > > > this based on having a separate standalone setup_data file, which is how > > > it should have been done in the first place. This is a larger project > > > with a few things to coordinate, but we can't really begin thinking > > > about that while trying to play whack-a-mole with the current buggy > > > implementation. > > > > > > So this commit removes the setup_data setting from x86_load_linux(), > > > while leaving intact the infrastructure we'll need in the future to try > > > again. > > > > > > Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> > > > Cc: Dov Murik <dovmurik@linux.ibm.com> > > > Cc: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com> > > > Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com> > > > Cc: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com> > > > Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> > > > Cc: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org> > > > Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> > > > Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org> > > > Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> > > > Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> > > > Cc: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org> > > > Signed-off-by: Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> > > > > I think I'll be happier if this is just a revert of > > the relevant commits in reverse order to make life easier > > for backporters. > > Unless that's too much work as we made other changes around > > this code? > > I think that's going to be messy. And it won't handle the dtb stuff > either straightforwardly.
List of Fixes tags so people can at least figure out whether they have a version that needs this fix then?
-- MST
| |