From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [patch] x86/efi: use GFP_ATOMIC under spin_lock Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 16:31:41 +0000 Message-ID: <20140309163141.GA18824@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20140307112055.GE2351@elgon.mountain> <20140307121022.GA32575@gmail.com> <20140307122103.GM4774@mwanda> <20140309161946.GA10262@console-pimps.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140309161946.GA10262@console-pimps.org> Sender: kernel-janitors-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Matt Fleming Cc: Dan Carpenter , Ingo Molnar , Matt Fleming , Nathan Zimmer , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Jan Beulich List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 09, 2014 at 04:20:20PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote: > We have tried to use the time functions before, with little success > because of various bugs in the runtime implementations, e.g. see commit > bacef661acdb ("x86-64/efi: Use EFI to deal with platform wall clock") > and commit bd52276fa1d4 ("x86-64/efi: Use EFI to deal with platform wall > clock (again)"). I'd naively expected that these would be more reliable after the 1:1 mapping patches, so it might actually be time to give them another go. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org