linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86_64 EFI runtime service support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <m1vebbqhxh.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
Date:	Sun, 19 Aug 2007 16:27:06 -0600
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>,
	Chandramouli Narayanan <mouli@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] x86_64 EFI runtime service support

"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> writes:

> Huang, Ying wrote:
>> 
>> One question:
>> 
>> The boot_params.efi_info.efi_systab is defined as u32. But it should be
>> u64 on x86_64, because it comes from firmware and is not controlled by
>> bootloader. But, changing it from u32 to u64 will break current i386 EFI
>> support, should we change it and fix the i386 EFI bootloader?
>> 
>
> The other option is to have a union of a 32-bit and a 64-bit structure.
>  I personally don't care, as long as it's consistent, but I think you
> need to deal with the people working on EFI currently about that...

It sounds like the 64bit EFI is currently binary incompatible with
the 32bit EFI.

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/