於 一，2012-10-29 於 19:11 +，Matt Fleming 提到：
> On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 14:52 +0800, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> > The cc9c97b76aa7235d5a1de0f74f990097f77008b4 patch introduced a
> > issue that always unregister kset of efivars in register_efivars.
> >
> > This patch moved the kset_unregister function cal
> > + utf16_strlen(efi_name))) {
> > + /*
> > +* Check if an old format,
> > +* which doesn't support holding
> > +* multiple logs, remains.
> > +*/
> > + efivars->walk_entry = list_entry(
> > + efivars->walk_entry->list.next,
> > +struct efivar_entry, list);
>
> odd wrap.
>
I will fix it.
Thanks,
Seiji
--
To unsubscribe from this li
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Seiji Aguchi wrote:
> [Issue]
>
> A format of variable name has been updated to type, id, count and ctime
> to support holding multiple logs.
>
> Format of current variable name
> dump-type0-1-2-12345678
>
> type:0
> id:1
> count:2
> ctime:12345678
>
> On
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Seiji Aguchi wrote:
> [Issue]
>
> A format of variable name has been updated to type, id, count and ctime
> to support holding multiple logs.
>
> Format of current variable name
> dump-type0-1-2-12345678
>
> type:0
> id:1
> count:2
> ctime:12345678
>
> On
On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 14:52 +0800, Lee, Chun-Yi wrote:
> The cc9c97b76aa7235d5a1de0f74f990097f77008b4 patch introduced a
> issue that always unregister kset of efivars in register_efivars.
>
> This patch moved the kset_unregister function call to the kobject create check
> block for fix issue.
>
On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 22:53 +0100, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> Use no_llseek as the llseek callback for efivarfs files, as we don't
> support writes to arbitrary locations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Kerr
>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/efivars.c |2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
A
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 08:49:41AM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > This is pretty much identical to the first patchset, but with the capability
> > renamed (CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL) and the kexec patch dropped. If anyone wants
> > to deploy these then th
Hi Josh,
於 二，2012-09-25 於 09:08 -0400，Josh Boyer 提到：
> This forcibly drops CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL from both cap_permitted and cap_bset
> in the init_cred struct, which everything else inherits from. This works on
> any machine and can be used to develop even if the box doesn't have UEFI.
>
> Sig
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> This is pretty much identical to the first patchset, but with the capability
> renamed (CAP_COMPROMISE_KERNEL) and the kexec patch dropped. If anyone wants
> to deploy these then they should disable kexec until support for signed
> kexec payloads has b
10 matches
Mail list logo
