[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200412035111.GA10163@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 11:51:11 +0800
From: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
Gary Lin <glin@...e.com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>,
Sergey Shatunov <me@...k.pw>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 0/9] EFI fixes for v5.7-rc
On 04/11/20 at 03:43pm, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 09:54:42PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> >
> > The runtime cleanup looks a very good one, but I also missed that,
> > userspace kexec-tools will break with the efi setup_data changes. But
> > kexec_file_load will just work with the cleanup applied.
>
> Hmmm, I wonder if there could be some kselftest or kunit tests that
> would make it easier to pick up these sorts of regressions earlier?
I thought about that before, but did not go with any actual actions.
kexec test needs a system reboot, Kdump is even harder to test, that is
the reason I hesitated about.
But since the breakage happens here and there frequently, it is time to
try it. I think I will play with it, but I might be slow because of
other things, welcome to post patches if anyone is interested :)
Thanks
Dave
Powered by blists - more mailing lists