linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86-64: use EFI to deal with platform wall clock

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <4FBFBAB5020000780008635F@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 May 2012 16:00:37 +0100
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To:	"Matthew Garrett" <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
Cc:	<mingo@...e.hu>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	<matt.fleming@...ux.intel.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: use EFI to deal with platform wall clock

>>> On 16.05.12 at 14:39, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 01:18:28PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> So I'm afraid if the patch as I provided it isn't acceptable, and
>> if the call to efi_enter_virtual_mode() can't be moved ahead
>> of the one to timekeeping_init(), this winds down to the whole
>> logic needing a re-write.
> 
> I have zero objection to this being cleaned up, but I don't know of any 
> obvious reason why we can't do enter_virtual_mode() earlier.

So this indeed works (moving enter_virual_mode() invocation
to the end of mm_init(), which seems to most logical place to
me) on the single system I can try this out on. I'll submit an
updated patch soon.

Jan

--
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/