Hi, On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 10:07:00AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 11:10, Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > ... > > > > Speaking as an user, I think it would be nice to revert the commit, that's > > how I am running v6.1-rcX kernels on the machine, as updating the firmware > > is not feasible right now. But I realize that I'm not the one maintaining > > the code, so I don't have a strong opinion about it :) And it's better now > > than it was at rc3, when the kernel was panicing. > > > > I sent out a patch yesterday that tweaks the sync exception fixup > handler to only disable the runtime service that triggered the > exception. This means, of course, that you might hit it multiple times > if several runtime service implementations are buggy, but there are > only five or so that we actually use, so that shouldn't make a huge > difference. But it also means a) we don't trigger other code paths > that freak out when a runtime service that was available suddenly goes > away and b) the diagnostics are more useful because we will find out > which other runtime services are broken. > > Could you please test that patch? And for good measure, could you try > something like > > efibootmgr -t 3 > > (as root) to exercise the SetVariable() path as well? Tried booting with the patch applied yesterday, no regression as far as I could tell (still hitting the two add_taint() statements, but that's not what the patch does). I was trying to figure out how I could test that the other runtime services are still working correctly, your suggestion is exactly what I was looking for, thanks. The machine is a shared machine, will test when I get access to it (hopefully later today) and post my findings. Thanks, Alex
