From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f171.google.com ([209.85.212.171]:38534 "EHLO mail-wi0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752812AbbG3Qps (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Jul 2015 12:45:48 -0400 Received: by wibxm9 with SMTP id xm9so76557928wib.1 for ; Thu, 30 Jul 2015 09:45:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 17:45:44 +0100 From: Matt Fleming To: Greg KH Cc: fupan.li@windriver.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fupanli@gmail.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Luis Henriques , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.10 ~ 3.14] efi: fix the efi 32bit boot failed problem Message-ID: <20150730164544.GL2725@codeblueprint.co.uk> References: <1438078879-24705-1-git-send-email-fupan.li@windriver.com> <20150730150428.GJ2725@codeblueprint.co.uk> <20150730163102.GA19943@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150730163102.GA19943@kroah.com> Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 30 Jul, at 09:31:02AM, Greg KH wrote: > > Why isn't this an issue in newer kernel releases? Did this already get > fixed by some other patch? If so, why can't we just take that patch? > If not, why not? The commit 35d5134b7d5a ("x86/efi: Correct EFI boot stub use of code32_start") only exists in the stable trees in that form because there was quite a lot of churn in that area in Linus tree that didn't get backported. So the code in Linus' tree never looked like the code in the stable does right now. > I _REALLY_ don't like taking patches that are not already in Linus's > tree, as it almost always turns out to be the wrong solution. Yeah, I think this issue verifies that. -- Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center