From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1ad4lP-0004MN-Lv for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 18:40:35 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36243) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ad2vi-0008J1-FF for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 16:43:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ad2vf-0000cd-2w for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 16:43:06 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::234]:34723) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ad2ve-0000Zi-Rl for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 16:43:03 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-x234.google.com with SMTP id p65so125905807wmp.1 for ; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 13:43:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=codeblueprint-co-uk.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=UdmCWVbW8o4cVrCL3Ht3eco1Lkj7JEBv9UrFRXVct5c=; b=UWNs8cHXTM+jSYAPd1QcACLk6qAz6dI6igybCvsrHFTGI1zxZTzVK5NABo8aVxs1Gx hIOKYuAUA2Bf1zwBXpsrpsvQiisfiU4+8n21T70ZWWdj2/fUnYL0ltyFNTriDxRFOd/o FpqEKspOu4ZYt94os391s5yhqpvesLlY5Rq3rzWglYzRyXNNYXrBqZNqY5TL1IzFYaUv SobEyN6pXT1yRC8tXrRQu0KTyEvG3dIEX6YMo+ptafQ2XZXbpU2LjAu374ErVS41FAUW KCFsnHwVgJrEl4cs0XmyQ9QEmqu2c47ZEo6zYjdhddqElnIGuFaZXWtpqHbeQmH0XU1/ 3bTA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=UdmCWVbW8o4cVrCL3Ht3eco1Lkj7JEBv9UrFRXVct5c=; b=aeZXx2x2m2dRE+XPkOxWpkqIqD+dL36WDEre+7ZLj/FDhGYZMSyRrKfEPfZ59BEYFT mxbkGFncg4gFWEbElUG1Ryb89PRV9f2iqQNZzIq3SuZzbYIdUo+eQSQKQN4ablzY4oaV lF7LaGQpcDUEue2EL4ap82Keg+uJx7aJ7I8ujd5R4bbftzvMExTwMTH1Ub6ymE1Lwl/4 YlizHBYjpG2EJvpgLlsa/VDwZ4bz02I81l08DpBjrx6Au44iy+3AkwXsCud/gQrXRjwD ZrmU5j1O/kkwUO6mjrXK3F99vzl+MRhX7ttz534vz9DcbpCDuTv/J4Ge+cGc9EUx+EKA rqOw== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKi7qSDqOIB/wUvTL0dVJZvWc0RyFz2aaxXLPiGdDtvLEO65/NlD93AKqePydD+vw== X-Received: by 10.28.177.134 with SMTP id a128mr16567708wmf.55.1457386980905; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 13:43:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (bcdc58e5.skybroadband.com. [188.220.88.229]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id za6sm19968246wjc.18.2016.03.07.13.42.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 07 Mar 2016 13:43:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 21:42:59 +0000 From: Matt Fleming To: Peter Jones Subject: Re: Bugs and tasks for 2.02[~rc1] Message-ID: <20160307214259.GE27675@codeblueprint.co.uk> References: <20160304200641.GC27106@redhat.com> <56DA9AE8.3010006@gmail.com> <20160307190016.GA13163@redhat.com> <56DDE5B0.6080002@gmail.com> <56DDEB3D.4010505@gmail.com> <20160307211958.GF13163@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160307211958.GF13163@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24+41 (02bc14ed1569) (2015-08-30) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c09::234 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 18:40:34 -0500 Cc: Andrei Borzenkov , Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko , Colin Watson , The development of GRUB 2 X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GNU GRUB List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 21:43:07 -0000 On Mon, 07 Mar, at 04:20:00PM, Peter Jones wrote: > On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 11:57:33PM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: > > > > > How big part of it is related to secure boot? Just > > > changing Linux boot protocol doesn't need FSF involvement. Accepting secure > > > > Patches currently use EFI stub to launch kernel but I think this is done > > simply to make code easier. We can continue to use the same load > > protocol as before, just add image verification. > > No, they're doing it because that is the supported entry point for EFI > in Linux. We do not want EFI machines using other entry points. It > worked out terribly when we used to do this, and we don't want to start > again. I've Cc'd Matt Fleming, the upstream kernel EFI maintainer, > because I'm sure he's going to agree with me. Yeah, I agree with you. Having multiple entry points works out badly for everyone, since they tend to bit rot, and few people test all of them equally. While we continue to support legacy boot entry points upstream, we're not actively adding support for new features to them for EFI. For boot loaders, the EFI handover protocol is definitely the preferred method of booting Linux on EFI.