From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 0/4] EFI 1:1 mapping Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:04:34 +0200 Message-ID: <20130619130434.GB24957@gmail.com> References: <1371491416-11037-1-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de> <20130619125243.GD11209@gmail.com> <20130619130225.GA28311@pd.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130619130225.GA28311-fF5Pk5pvG8Y@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Linux EFI , Matt Fleming , Matthew Garrett , X86 ML , LKML , Borislav Petkov List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org * Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 02:52:43PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I hope making it a weird boot option is not the end plan, there's > > little point in _not_ enabling 1:1 mappings by default eventually: > > the 1:1 mapping is supposed to emulate a "Windows compatible" EFI > > environment better and is expected to work around certain EFI runtime > > crashes. > > And yet there are the Macs which reportedly cannot stomach this. Do we know why? > And then there's the issue where some boxes cannot boot through the EFI > stub with those patches even without "efi=1:1_map" on the command line. > The issue has something to do with the "cmpb $0, efi_use_11_map" in the > efi_callX stubs. A bug I suspect? > And then again, other boxes have no problem with it and boot perfectly > fine. > > So I don't know - it all looks like a weird boot, opt-in option for now. But once it works reliably we can enable it, right? Thanks, Ingo