Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756079Ab3EaMoL (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2013 08:44:11 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f174.google.com ([209.85.212.174]:40890 "EHLO mail-wi0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755634Ab3EaMoA (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2013 08:44:00 -0400 Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 14:43:56 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Jiri Kosina , Russ Anderson , joeyli , Matt Fleming , Matthew Garrett , matt.fleming@intel.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [regression, bisected] x86: efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code Message-ID: <20130531124356.GA8212@gmail.com> References: <20130529210115.GC28027@sgi.com> <20130529224645.GA16582@sgi.com> <1369880172.17397.11.camel@linux-s257.site> <20130530221737.GA11105@sgi.com> <20130531101250.GD30394@gmail.com> <20130531123015.GC17843@nazgul.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130531123015.GC17843@nazgul.tnic> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2022 Lines: 50 * Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 01:06:09PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > > > (*) If one would be naive enough, he'd believe that the pressure > > should be put on the BIOS writers instead of OS to fix the bug :) > > Oh, definitely pressure on BIOS dudes. If they're in violation of the > spec and they still can fix it in time, they better. I'm sick and tired > of having to deal with BIOS idiocy in kernel code. I'm all for some BIOS quality bashing, but the reality is: 1) It's not just about SGI/UV systems but apparently about several different types of x86 laptops produce the same boot crash pattern: most of which come from manufacturers that simply don't care about Linux all that much. So by not reverting we'd screw our users, not put any recognizable pressure on any BIOS writers or manufacturers. 2) Obviously Windows does not crash, and that's what most laptops test. So our realistic 'spec target' is not some sort of pure 'EFI spec', but EFI implementations _tested under Windows_. Consider it an 'extended EFI compatibility spec'. 3) There's a better, more robust firmware environment approach being worked on (by you?) that avoids such 1:1 physical mapping assumption crashes. That's something worth doing anyway, so why not delay the early QueryVariableInfo() call change to when that enviroment is properly implemented? 4) The revert is easy, and the functionality the original patch provided was a marginal increase in debug output to begin with... So to me the right approach seems to be: A: revert now for v3.10 B: implement 1:1 mappings environment for firmware, for v3.11 C: reintroduce the early QueryVariableInfo() call again, in v3.11 Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/