On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 18:12 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> The solution you're proposing has the same downsides as 3) - we risk
> having to tweak things either way. The difference is that in the case of
> 3) the tweaking is adding entries to the whitelist, whereas tweaking
> your solution has more
On 03/04/13 14:48, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 14:11 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
>
>> This looks like something that will differ between implementations, and the
>> fact that it's appearing in our code is a sure sign that this isn't the way
>> to
>> go.
>
> Our choices right
On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 14:11 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> This looks like something that will differ between implementations, and the
> fact that it's appearing in our code is a sure sign that this isn't the way to
> go.
Our choices right now are:
1) Break machines that don't garbage collect on
On 01/04/13 16:14, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> @@ -452,8 +462,33 @@ check_var_size_locked(struct efivars *efivars, u32
> attributes,
> if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
> return status;
>
> - if (!storage_size || size > remaining_size || size > max_size ||
> -
On 01/04/13 16:14, Matthew Garrett wrote:
@@ -452,8 +462,33 @@ check_var_size_locked(struct efivars *efivars, u32
attributes,
if (status != EFI_SUCCESS)
return status;
- if (!storage_size || size remaining_size || size max_size ||
- (remaining_size -
On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 14:11 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
This looks like something that will differ between implementations, and the
fact that it's appearing in our code is a sure sign that this isn't the way to
go.
Our choices right now are:
1) Break machines that don't garbage collect on
On 03/04/13 14:48, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 14:11 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
This looks like something that will differ between implementations, and the
fact that it's appearing in our code is a sure sign that this isn't the way
to
go.
Our choices right now are:
On Wed, 2013-04-03 at 18:12 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
The solution you're proposing has the same downsides as 3) - we risk
having to tweak things either way. The difference is that in the case of
3) the tweaking is adding entries to the whitelist, whereas tweaking
your solution has more
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 11:14 -0400, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> EFI implementations distinguish between space that is actively used by a
> variable and space that merely hasn't been garbage collected yet. Space
> that hasn't yet been garbage collected isn't available for use and so isn't
> counted in
EFI implementations distinguish between space that is actively used by a
variable and space that merely hasn't been garbage collected yet. Space
that hasn't yet been garbage collected isn't available for use and so isn't
counted in the remaining_space field returned by QueryVariableInfo().
EFI implementations distinguish between space that is actively used by a
variable and space that merely hasn't been garbage collected yet. Space
that hasn't yet been garbage collected isn't available for use and so isn't
counted in the remaining_space field returned by QueryVariableInfo().
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 11:14 -0400, Matthew Garrett wrote:
EFI implementations distinguish between space that is actively used by a
variable and space that merely hasn't been garbage collected yet. Space
that hasn't yet been garbage collected isn't available for use and so isn't
counted in the
12 matches
Mail list logo
