Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757397Ab3FALCj (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:02:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pd0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:40878 "EHLO mail-pd0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756590Ab3FALC3 (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:02:29 -0400 Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2013 20:01:59 +0900 (PWT) From: Linus Torvalds 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" , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [regression, bisected] x86: efi: Pass boot services variable info to runtime code In-Reply-To: <20130531143425.GA5850@srcf.ucam.org> Message-ID: 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> User-Agent: Alpine 2.03 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1819 Lines: 37 On Fri, 31 May 2013, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > 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 So "differently break" doesn't matter, if it's old breakage, and people thus don't really expect it to work. We need to fix bugs without *new* breakage, and quite frankly, I have been distressed by hearing the EFI "specifications" mentioned so many times in this thread. Firmware specs are pure and utter garbage. They are irrelevant. Firmware is buggy, and will always be buggy. The "spec" doesn't matter. We should use firmware for loading the kernel, and as little else as humanly possible. I'm very disappointed in how the EFI code doesn't seem to understand that. There's tons of these stupid EFI variable crap that simply shouldn't matter. Quite frankly, we'd be better off ignoring as much of it by default as at all possible. Exactly because the more of an EFI interface we have, the more we open us up to th einevitable firmware bugs. Anyway, I'm traveling with absolutely horrendous internet access, so can somebody please send a description of the revert with the relevant information, because I literally have a hard time extracting it all from this thread because my email access is so slow and flaky... Make it easy for me to do the revert with a good explanation message, please, Linus -- 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/