@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
#include <asm/io_apic.h>
#include <asm/hypervisor.h>
+#include <asm/e820/api.h>
#include <asm/xen/interface.h>
#include <asm/xen/hypercall.h>
@@ -38,34 +39,32 @@ static void __init init_pvh_bootparams(void)
memset(&pvh_bootparams, 0, sizeof(pvh_bootparams));
- memmap.nr_entries = ARRAY_SIZE(pvh_bootparams.e820_map);
- set_xen_guest_handle(memmap.buffer, pvh_bootparams.e820_map);
+ memmap.nr_entries = ARRAY_SIZE(pvh_bootparams.e820_table);
+ set_xen_guest_handle(memmap.buffer, pvh_bootparams.e820_table);
rc = HYPERVISOR_memory_op(XENMEM_memory_map, &memmap);
if (rc) {
xen_raw_printk("XENMEM_memory_map failed (%d)\n", rc);
BUG();
}
- if (memmap.nr_entries < E820MAX - 1) {
- pvh_bootparams.e820_map[memmap.nr_entries].addr =
+ if (memmap.nr_entries < E820_MAX_ENTRIES_ZEROPAGE - 1) {
+ pvh_bootparams.e820_table[memmap.nr_entries].addr =
ISA_START_ADDRESS;
- pvh_bootparams.e820_map[memmap.nr_entries].size =
+ pvh_bootparams.e820_table[memmap.nr_entries].size =
ISA_END_ADDRESS - ISA_START_ADDRESS;
- pvh_bootparams.e820_map[memmap.nr_entries].type =
- E820_RESERVED;
+ pvh_bootparams.e820_table[memmap.nr_entries].type =
+ E820_TYPE_RESERVED;
memmap.nr_entries++;
} else
xen_raw_printk("Warning: Can fit ISA range into e820\n");
- sanitize_e820_map(pvh_bootparams.e820_map,
- ARRAY_SIZE(pvh_bootparams.e820_map),
- &memmap.nr_entries);
-
pvh_bootparams.e820_entries = memmap.nr_entries;
for (i = 0; i < pvh_bootparams.e820_entries; i++)
- e820_add_region(pvh_bootparams.e820_map[i].addr,
- pvh_bootparams.e820_map[i].size,
- pvh_bootparams.e820_map[i].type);
+ e820__range_add(pvh_bootparams.e820_table[i].addr,
+ pvh_bootparams.e820_table[i].size,
+ pvh_bootparams.e820_table[i].type);
+
+ e820__update_table(e820_table);
pvh_bootparams.hdr.cmd_line_ptr =
pvh_start_info.cmdline_paddr;
Hi all, Today's linux-next merge of the xen-tip tree got a conflict in: arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c between commit: 687d77a5f7b2 ("x86/xen: Update e820 table handling to the new core x86 E820 code") from the tip tree and commit: ca7b75377014 ("x86/xen: split off enlighten_pvh.c") from the xen-tip tree. The latter moved the code changed by the former to another file, so I have applied the following merge fix patch. I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree is submitted for merging. You may also want to consider cooperating with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly complex conflicts. From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 14:27:23 +1000 Subject: [PATCH] x86/xen: merge fix for arch/x86/xen/enlighten.c code movement Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> --- arch/x86/xen/enlighten_pvh.c | 27 +++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)