linux-kernel - Re: [regression, bisected] x86: efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code

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]

Date:	Fri, 31 May 2013 15:34:25 +0100
From:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
	Russ Anderson <rja@....com>, joeyli <jlee@...e.com>,
	Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>, matt.fleming@...el.com,
	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [regression, bisected] x86: efi: Pass boot services variable
 info to runtime code

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 02:43:56PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> 4) The revert is easy, and the functionality the original patch provided
>    was a marginal increase in debug output to begin with...

I agree that a revert is probably the right thing to do here, but the 
original patch was there to permit a more accurate calculation of the 
amount of nvram in use, not to provide additional debug information. 
Reverting it is going to differently break a different set of systems

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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/