linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: use core efi=debug instead of uefi

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: <20150826172455.GB2837@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date:	Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:24:55 +0100
From:	Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To:	Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, matt.fleming@...el.com,
	ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, msalter@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: use core efi=debug instead of uefi_debug
 command line parameter

On Wed, 26 Aug, at 02:24:57PM, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> Now that we have an efi=debug command line option in the core code, use
> this instead of the arm64-specific uefi_debug option.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@...aro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/arm/uefi.txt |  2 --
>  arch/arm64/kernel/efi.c    | 19 +++++--------------
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

Are there no concerns with backwards-compatibility here? I expected
this patch to internally convert uefi_debug to efi=debug if old boot
loaders, kernel config, etc specify it.

Is that something that can be safely ignored?

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/