From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Borislav Petkov Subject: Re: [edk2] Corrupted EFI region Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:40:10 +0200 Message-ID: <20130805144010.GE31845@pd.tnic> References: <20130731205431.GG4724@pd.tnic> <1375307727.22084.103.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20130801164927.GA7445@pd.tnic> <51FF8C14.2070405@redhat.com> <20130805130258.GB31845@pd.tnic> <51FFAB13.4090603@redhat.com> <20130805140306.GD31845@pd.tnic> <51FFB660.4060400@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51FFB660.4060400-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Laszlo Ersek Cc: edk2-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, David Woodhouse , linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, lkml , Gleb Natapov , Matthew Garrett List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 04:27:44PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > I wouldn't call the design of SetVirtualAddressMap() braindead. Ok, I've always wondered and you could probably shed some light on the matter: why is SetVirtualAddressMap() a call-once only? Why can't I simply call it again and update the mappings? > I'd rather call kexec unique and somewhat unexpected :) In all fairness, it was there before UEFI, AFAICT. > > I wouldn't wonder if we f*cked it up again like the last time. I'll give > > it a long hard look. > > Ah sorry, by "and you guys suspect" I didn't mean to imply anything > between the lines, I was simply trying to ascertain your working idea :) As long as we get to the bottom of this, we're all fine. And I'd pretty much expect everyone who is dealing with EFI to have grown a sufficiently thick skin before starting to do so, so don't worry. :-) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --