Re: [PATCH] x86, efi: add no_bricked_efi whitelist

2013-11-22 Thread Matthew Garrett
On Fri, 2013-11-22 at 15:23 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote: > I don't know how to implement your idea. But if GC run by your idea, the free > space may spread out. So 1) case is solved. But it does not solve 2) case. > In my opinion, if system has sane firmware, all nvram strage should be used. >

Re: [PATCH] x86, efi: add no_bricked_efi whitelist

2013-11-21 Thread Yasuaki Ishimatsu
(2013/11/22 9:03), Matthew Garrett wrote: On Fri, 2013-11-22 at 09:00 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote: (2013/11/22 5:12), Matthew Garrett wrote: On Thu, 2013-11-21 at 18:35 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote: Remaining space is free space that can be used by efi variable. But by 5KB threshold, we

Re: [PATCH] x86, efi: add no_bricked_efi whitelist

2013-11-20 Thread Richard Weinberger
Am Mittwoch, 20. November 2013, 17:34:18 schrieb Yasuaki Ishimatsu: > By following works, my system very often fails set_variable() to set new > variable to efi variable storage and shows "efivars: set_variable() failed: > status=-28" message. > > - commit 68d929862e29a8b52a7f2f2f86a0600423b093cd

[PATCH] x86, efi: add no_bricked_efi whitelist

2013-11-20 Thread Yasuaki Ishimatsu
By following works, my system very often fails set_variable() to set new variable to efi variable storage and shows "efivars: set_variable() failed: status=-28" message. - commit 68d929862e29a8b52a7f2f2f86a0600423b093cd efi: be more paranoid about available space when creating variables - comm