From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.zytor.com (terminus.zytor.com [198.137.202.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2050D2D781F for ; Fri, 23 Jan 2026 00:12:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.136 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769127141; cv=none; b=b09DCtVRGXm9yc1VSlg67QPOW5TizE2SzmQDByiaNubbHitCt0Z/4DTkpXsRRu47pzpmwPfLmdU3jZOkl8oWO0ELFf250mCefcbOSjvrFX26P7VzvrFXhNnxYjUknO0IDXF6jv2fYy0TX06dlGCJw/p+5eRSkNfcmFgqnidE1O4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769127141; c=relaxed/simple; bh=2gEBWPWCmAkBdN71OL6mI0scsA5CQq5nO4hs9jV+pIQ=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=lGARXOt9fvCZbz27exTHXc8YJmTk6Mzi0wUGLu3aIQiNlUr1Er0t4LPFGTCT7UtQtPmqoz/oukkZPqYzoq1Ypeq5oQstWG8ply4kg/SGQgxuaaWq4GrXXRP1WkDAYEDrn/AfHtaqngbMZMjtp0K0uAShEWTpkaTkxAUu1GMye3E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zytor.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=zytor.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=zytor.com header.i=@zytor.com header.b=fzEh9SEr; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.136 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zytor.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=zytor.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=zytor.com header.i=@zytor.com header.b="fzEh9SEr" Received: from ehlo.thunderbird.net (c-76-133-66-138.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [76.133.66.138]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.zytor.com (8.18.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPSA id 60N0BVbm4145275 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 22 Jan 2026 16:11:32 -0800 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mail.zytor.com 60N0BVbm4145275 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zytor.com; s=2025122301; t=1769127093; bh=LNURKIek5aFeosQ4J4ZJquDGaO+Trqe9o708gtN5DzE=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=fzEh9SErycq418GfcG6K+dPOXwqKA8/kw6Ah+hND61EOhvejdzw69Uh+dkmh8UpbZ Y0EwKc1M+A22AE75lhQa6OuOcnzBwVRNhFVOJsvwtqwPGr9MVb4SgSCYmJlcTzLWO3 2C9oHrDUZFT2UtIprodDHBxwEOrUp+NGvEeytwWFYbdZ/rR1swTV2oiJlJ23OIcoQ7 qngskCSNeHAFI0ld+zWgUE5B/EIQyivW7Nltby/1xdePAiP3y9pRdkkATkUqQiWOgQ xL0uKLmG58gIxkKh7TZy6M7p6bdbIqiRmESieUgNKYpUy6EEqIWBXau5aOLbx6btGN NBpbjeBhVEZag== Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 16:11:25 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" To: Simon Glass , ubizjak@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org CC: akpm@linux-foundation.org, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, kas@kernel.org, kees@kernel.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, mingo@redhat.com, nathan@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, pmladek@suse.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, tglx@kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: re: [PATCH v1 08/14] x86: make CONFIG_EFI_STUB unconditional User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <20260122185740.50298-1-sjg@chromium.org> References: <20260122185740.50298-1-sjg@chromium.org> Message-ID: <90DAAB54-CBF0-47BD-981A-FEDD26CDA0FD@zytor.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On January 22, 2026 10:57:39 AM PST, Simon Glass wrote= : >Hi Peter, > >On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 8:54=E2=80=AFPM H=2E Peter Anvin wrote: >> >> The EFI stub code is mature, most current x86 systems require EFI to >> boot, and as it is exclusively preboot code, it doesn't affect the >> runtime memory footprint at all=2E >>=20 >> It makes absolutely no sense to omit it anymore, so make it >> unconditional=2E >>=20 >> Signed-off-by: H=2E Peter Anvin (Intel) >> --- >> arch/x86/Kconfig | 14 ++------------ >> arch/x86/boot/compressed/Makefile | 2 -- >> arch/x86/boot/compressed/error=2Ec | 2 -- >> arch/x86/boot/header=2ES | 3 --- >> 4 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) > >At least with QEMU the EFI protocol adds quite a lot of overhead=2E > >Is there any actual need for this? > >Regards, >Simon > Including the EFI stub doesn't mean using EFI to boot is required=2E