Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755786Ab3EaOmq (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2013 10:42:46 -0400 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:60781 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751207Ab3EaOmk (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2013 10:42:40 -0400 Message-ID: <1370011357.1913.15.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Subject: Re: [regression, bisected] x86: efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code From: James Bottomley To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Jiri Kosina , Russ Anderson , joeyli , Matt Fleming , 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 Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 07:42:37 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20130531143425.GA5850@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20130529224645.GA16582@sgi.com> <1369880172.17397.11.camel@linux-s257.site> <20130530221737.GA11105@sgi.com> <20130531101250.GD30394@gmail.com> <20130531123015.GC17843@nazgul.tnic> <20130531124356.GA8212@gmail.com> <20130531143425.GA5850@srcf.ucam.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1220 Lines: 30 On Fri, 2013-05-31 at 15:34 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 02:43:56PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > 4) The revert is easy, and the functionality the original patch provided > > was a marginal increase in debug output to begin with... > > I agree that a revert is probably the right thing to do here, but the > original patch was there to permit a more accurate calculation of the > amount of nvram in use, not to provide additional debug information. > Reverting it is going to differently break a different set of systems The only ones that are broken are the Samsung ones. Samsung claims to have fixed their UEFI firmware, so we could refer any problems to them. The signature of the Samsung failure, which this is guarding against is that the laptop gets bricked, so it really is a nasty choice of poisons we have to pick... Could we hedge the QueryVariableInfo checks with a test for Samsung in the UEFI identity strings? James -- 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/