(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-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
