linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 09/14] efi: passing kexec necessary efi data via setup

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, 13 Dec 2013 15:27:42 +0800
From:	Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
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 v5 09/14] efi: passing kexec necessary efi data via
 setup_data

On 12/12/13 at 10:04pm, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 03:17:43PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > Rethink about this issue, moving them to efi_$(BITS).c I need move the
> > efi_setup from a static variable to an extern, It looks not worth.
> 
> Dave, would you please do what is suggested to you? A big part of
> the efi code is split into 32-bit and 64-bit functionality. If you
> have a serious argument why it shouldn't be done so then sure, by all
> means, but stop coming up with silly arguments like having an extern
> declaration is a bad thing. Please.

Ok, will do.

--
Thanks
Dave
--
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/