On 2018-07-26 18:01:47 [+0200], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> Yes, that's what I was thinking. This way, you can still reboot into
> the same kernel occasionally with EFI runtime services enabled to,
> e.g., use efibootmgr.
>
> Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel
>
> for both patches if you queue them in the -rt
On 26 July 2018 at 15:14, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
wrote:
> On 2018-07-26 15:13:23 [+0200], To Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 2018-07-26 14:52:21 [+0200], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> > We could also make it the default on -rt, but not disable it entirely, so
>> > that efi=runtime can be used to re-ena
On 2018-07-26 15:13:23 [+0200], To Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 2018-07-26 14:52:21 [+0200], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > We could also make it the default on -rt, but not disable it entirely, so
> > that efi=runtime can be used to re-enable it.
>
> Oh. I like that. We have something similar for RCU.
On 2018-07-26 14:52:21 [+0200], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> We could also make it the default on -rt, but not disable it entirely, so
> that efi=runtime can be used to re-enable it.
Oh. I like that. We have something similar for RCU. So I would need
that:
--- >8
Subject: [PATCH] efi: Allow efi=
> On 26 Jul 2018, at 14:46, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-07-26 14:26:25 [+0200], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> What i mean is whatever you end up with if you pass efi=noruntime to the
>> kernel.
> ah. So I wouldn't have to patch this, just document it. That might work.
>
We c
On 2018-07-26 14:26:25 [+0200], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> What i mean is whatever you end up with if you pass efi=noruntime to the
> kernel.
ah. So I wouldn't have to patch this, just document it. That might work.
> But as i mentioned before, you may also lose the ability to reboot/shut down
> you
> On 26 Jul 2018, at 14:15, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> wrote:
>
>> On 2018-07-26 11:15:52 [+0200], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 26 July 2018 at 11:04, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
>> wrote:
>>> Based on measurements the EFI functions get_variable /
>>> get_next_variable take up to 2us. The func
On 2018-07-26 11:15:52 [+0200], Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 26 July 2018 at 11:04, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> wrote:
> > Based on measurements the EFI functions get_variable /
> > get_next_variable take up to 2us. The functions get_time, set_time take
> > around 10ms. Those 10ms are too much. Even
On 26 July 2018 at 11:04, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
wrote:
> Based on measurements the EFI functions get_variable /
> get_next_variable take up to 2us. The functions get_time, set_time take
> around 10ms. Those 10ms are too much. Even one ms would be too much.
You cannot extrapolate from these nu
Based on measurements the EFI functions get_variable /
get_next_variable take up to 2us. The functions get_time, set_time take
around 10ms. Those 10ms are too much. Even one ms would be too much.
The funny part is that EFI is invoked with enabled interrupts.
According to my tracing I see the interr
10 matches
Mail list logo