On Fri, 3 Jun 2022 at 10:12, Jason A. Donenfeld Jason@zx2c4.com wrote:
Hi Ard,
On 6/3/22, Ard Biesheuvel ardb@kernel.org wrote:
The problem is that your original patch
You remain extremely unpleasant to communicate with.
Noted.
Can we keep things on topic please?
Sure. Are you saying the original patch is off-topic? Isn't that the patch that caused the regression to begin with?
As far as I can tell, the early patching code on ARM does not rely on the early fixmap code. Did you try just moving jump_label_init() earlier in the function?
Also, how did you test this change?
Just booting a few configs in QEMU. I don't have access to real hardware right now unfortunately.
Let me give a try to just moving the jump_label_init() function alone. That'd certainly make this patch a lot more basic, which would be a good thing, and might assuage your well justified concerns that too much boot order churn will break something subtle. I was just afraid of complicated intermingling with the other stuff after I saw that arm64 did things in the other order. But maybe that's silly.
I'll send a v2 if that works, and send an update here if it doesn't. Thanks for the suggestion.
Jason