On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 6:59 PM Lennart Poettering <lennart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mi, 16.11.22 17:16, Jason A. Donenfeld (Jason@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > Commit messages are rather sparse at the moment. I'll fill those out for > > the next non-RFC patchset if this idea isn't immediately demolished. > > > > The biggest consideration is wear leveling on the EFI variable flash > > chips. However, EFI *already* winds up writing to non-volatile memory on > > every single boot anyway, so maybe it's not actually a big deal? > > So as mentioned elsewhere: This might (probably more than) double the > wear on the flash chips, since firmware is unlikely to batch these > writes with the monotonic counter write. > > I have no idea how realistic these issues are, there's a lot of > handwaving involved, but to sidestep the issue I put sd-boot's seed in > a file on disk (which should not have issues that much with wear) > instead of efi vars. Therein lies the rub indeed. Does anybody who knows something about the hardware and historical hardware know for certain that this would be a bad idea, or does it really not matter at all? Would be useful to have some definitive advice here. Jason
