From: Matt Porter <matt.porter@linaro.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>
Cc: Karel Zak <kzak@redhat.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: GPT detection regression in efi.c from commit 27a7c64
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 14:17:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5233569D.6020505@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1379093858.2197.24.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
On 09/13/2013 01:37 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 13:01 -0400, Matt Porter wrote:
>> On 09/13/2013 12:28 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> [...]
>>
>>>> I get that this is not compliant with UEFI. I bring this up because
>>>> before this commit the is_pmbr_valid() check was less pedantic. In 3.11
>>>> a PMBR formatted this way did not fail the check. For my particular
>>>> case, I simply dded out LBA 1 and whacked the SizeInLBA field to comply
>>>> with the spec and this patch and I'm back in business. We're updating
>>>> the tools that we inherited to prepopulate our boards with a GPT to be
>>>> compliant. However, I wondered if this would be a problem for all the
>>>> people with Windows-generated GPTs as noted in [1].
>>>
>>> I guess this comes down to choosing whether or not we want Linux to be
>>> more UEFI compliant or not. Should we care if Microsoft decides to go do
>>> things out of the official spec? I don't know the policy here. The fact
>>> is that *they* should update their partitioning tools and create valid
>>> pMBRs. Any way, I'm ok with reverting this commit if deemed necessary.
>>
>> I can't say first-hand that Windows 7/8 does what is claimed in this
>> description as I simply don't have access to any Windows machines here.
>> If it's true, I would have to agree with Linus that meeting reality if
>> more important than meeting the spec.
>
> Yep, me too.
>
>>
>> Hopefully somebody can confirm that Windows does indeed produce these
>> special PMBRs that need to be handled as an exception to the spec.
>
> I've got a partition with Windows 7 and I can take a look during the
> weekend. Do you know exactly what tool was used for creating the
> partition?
Just to be clear, we used an internal Broadcom tool that did this
Windows-like behavior on our bcm281xx reference board.
In the Windows situation, I really have no idea what tool Windows 7/8
use to partition disks. Based on that article, I'm assuming it's
whatever today's version of "FDISK", as shipped on Windows 7/8, is.
Ok, Google claims it is "The Windows 7 Disk Management" tool. I might
try to stop at somebody's house this weekend, boot Linux from USB and
extract the PMBR from their drive just as another data point.
-Matt
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-13 18:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-13 14:50 GPT detection regression in efi.c from commit 27a7c64 Matt Porter
2013-09-13 16:28 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-13 17:01 ` Matt Porter
2013-09-13 17:37 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-13 18:17 ` Matt Porter [this message]
2013-09-13 18:07 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-13 18:09 ` Matt Porter
2013-09-13 18:17 ` Karel Zak
2013-09-13 18:29 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-13 18:33 ` Matt Porter
2013-09-13 19:26 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-09-13 21:36 ` Matt Porter
2013-09-13 22:02 ` Davidlohr Bueso
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5233569D.6020505@linaro.org \
--to=matt.porter@linaro.org \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=kzak@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt.fleming@intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox