From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Fleming Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] efi: an sysfs interface for user to update efi firmware Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 15:36:40 +0100 Message-ID: <20150417143640.GB3671@codeblueprint.co.uk> References: <1429004697-28320-1-git-send-email-hock.leong.kweh@intel.com> <1429004697-28320-3-git-send-email-hock.leong.kweh@intel.com> <20150414140914.GE5989@kroah.com> <20150415131906.GC21491@kroah.com> <20150417134924.GB19794@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150417134924.GB19794@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: "Kweh, Hock Leong" , Ming Lei , "Ong, Boon Leong" , LKML , "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" , Sam Protsenko , Peter Jones , Andy Lutomirski , Roy Franz , Borislav Petkov List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 17 Apr, at 03:49:24PM, Greg KH wrote: > > Not really, the kernel namespace is what matters at that point in time. > > And maybe it does matter, I haven't thought through all of the issues. > But passing a path from userspace, to the kernel, to have the kernel > turn around again and use that path is full of nasty consequences at > times due to namespaces, let's avoid all of that please. Oh crap. The namespace issue is a good point and not something I'd thought of at all. At this point, I think we've really run out of objections to Andy's suggestion of implementing this as a misc device, right? The concern I had about userspace tooling can partly be addressed by including the source in tools/ in the kernel tree. So provided we do that, I'm happy enough to see this implemented as a misc device because the other options we've explored just haven't panned out. Objections? -- Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center