linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 06/12] efi: export efi runtime memory mapping to sysfs

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: <20131202094020.GA7380@pd.tnic>
Date:	Mon, 2 Dec 2013 10:40:20 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
	x86@...nel.org, mjg59@...f.ucam.org, hpa@...or.com,
	James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, vgoyal@...hat.com,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com, horms@...ge.net.au,
	kexec@...ts.infradead.org, greg@...ah.com, matt@...sole-pimps.org,
	toshi.kani@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/12] efi: export efi runtime memory mapping to sysfs

On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 10:59:42AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> They are only called if there's setup_data SETUP_EFI passed in. Yes, I
> think only kexec need that part of code. But I hesitated to mess the
> code with a lot of #if. Will think about it.

Well, the accepted strategy with the efi code is to have function calls
in efi.c and then have different versions of those functions defined for
32 and 64-bit, i.e. efi_32.c and efi_64.c.

I can imagine adding an efi_kexec.c could make the whole deal very
clearly arranged without ifdeffery.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/