Re: [PATCH] x86, efi: change name of efi_no_storage_paranoia parameterto efi_storage_paranoia

[Yasuaki Ishimatsu]

(2013/11/08 17:05), Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Am 08.11.2013 08:33, 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 31ff2f20d9003e74991d135f56e503fe776c127c
>>      efi: Distinguish between "remaining space" and actually used space
>> - commit 8c58bf3eec3b8fc8162fe557e9361891c20758f2
>>      x86,efi: Implement efi_no_storage_paranoia parameter
>> - commit f8b8404337de4e2466e2e1139ea68b1f8295974f
>>      Modify UEFI anti-bricking code
>>
>> When booting my system, remaining space of efi variable storage is about
>> 5KB. So there is no room that sets a new variable to the storage.
>>
>> According to above works, efi_no_storage_paranoia parameter was prepared
>> for sane UEFI which can do gc and fulfills spec. But why need a system
>> with a sane UEFI set the parameter? It is wrong. A system with a broken
>> UEFI should set the parameter.
> 
> And how does one know that his UEFI is broken?

I have no idea. But at least, bricked board is broken UEFI.
Do you know the issue occurs on several boards or specific board?

Thanks,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu

> "Oh my board is briked because I wrote too much into a variable, maybe setting
> efi_storage_paranoia would have saved me. Let's try with the next board..." ;)
> 
> Thanks,
> //richard
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/