* Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 12:15 AM Ard Biesheuvel
> <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > (+ Ingo)
> >
> > On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 21:52, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 6:07 AM Bartosz Szczepanek <bsz@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I may be a little late with this comment, but I've just tested these
> > > > patches on aarch64 platform (from the top of jjs/master) and got
> > > > kernel panic ("Unable to handle kernel read", full log at the end of
> > > > mail). I think there's problem with below call to
> > > > tpm2_calc_event_log_size(), where physical address of efi.tpm_log is
> > > > passed as (void *) and never remapped:
> > >
> > > Yes, it looks like this is just broken. Can you try with the attached patch?
> >
> > I'm a bit uncomfortable with EFI code that is obviously broken and
> > untested being queued for the next merge window in another tree.
>
> The patchset was Cc:ed to linux-efi@. Is there anything else I should
> have done to ensure you picked it up rather than Jarkko?
That's not the workflow rule the Linux kernel is using, if Cc:-ing a
patchset was the only condition for upstream inclusion then we'd have a
*LOT* of crap in the Linux kernel.
Just applying those EFI changes without even as much as an Acked-by from
the EFI maintainers is a *totally* unacceptable workflow.
Please revert/rebase and re-try this on the proper submission channels.
Meanwhile the broken code is NAK-ed by me:
Nacked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks,
Ingo
