Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752325Ab3JWHxi (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Oct 2013 03:53:38 -0400 Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:26499 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751378Ab3JWHxg (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Oct 2013 03:53:36 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 09:53:14 +0200 From: Daniel Kiper To: "Maliszewski, Richard L" Cc: "Vladimir =?utf-8?Q?'=CF=86-coder=2Fphcoder'?= Serbinenko" , The development of GNU GRUB , "Woodhouse, David" , Matthew Garrett , "keir@xen.org" , Ian Campbell , "stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , Jan Beulich , "ross.philipson@citrix.com" , "boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com" Subject: Re: EFI and multiboot2 devlopment work for Xen Message-ID: <20131023075314.GT3626@debian70-amd64.local.net-space.pl> References: <20131022165140.GL3626@debian70-amd64.local.net-space.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Source-IP: acsinet22.oracle.com [141.146.126.238] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1484 Lines: 31 On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 05:21:15PM +0000, Maliszewski, Richard L wrote: > The latter. The code I was looking at definitely has the linuxefi > directive. FWIW, if you install FC18/19 on an EFI system, the grub2 > config file uses the linuxefi and companion initrd directives for launch. > > --Richard > > On 10/22/13 9:51 AM, "Daniel Kiper" wrote: > > >On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 04:36:04PM +0000, Maliszewski, Richard L wrote: > >> I may be off-base, but when I was wading through the grub2 code earlier > >> this year, it looked to me like it was going to refuse to launch > >>anything > >> via MB1 or MB2 if the current state was a secure boot launch. > > > >Are you talking about upstream GRUB2 or GRUB2 with tons of distros > >patches including linuxefi one. If later one it could be the case. I realized that in SB case GRUB2 with linuefi patches does not have a lot features (correct me if I am wrong). So you are able to just load Linux or something which supports Linux Boot protocol. It is not so flexible as it was designed. I think that it should be changed and support for others systems/hypervisors should be added without breaking SB support of course. GRUB2 upstream solution is preferred. Daniel -- 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/