Message ID | 1480976718-12198-4-git-send-email-daniel.kiper@oracle.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
>>> On 05.12.16 at 23:25, <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: > ..nor EFI platforms with runtime services enabled. Btw, was the title meant to read "... neither on non-EFI platforms ..."? Jan
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 06:18:19AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 05.12.16 at 23:25, <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: > > ..nor EFI platforms with runtime services enabled. > > Btw, was the title meant to read "... neither on non-EFI platforms ..."? Right, thanks for pointing this out. Daniel
On 12/7/16 7:18 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 05.12.16 at 23:25, <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: >> ..nor EFI platforms with runtime services enabled. > > Btw, was the title meant to read "... neither on non-EFI platforms ..."? > > Jan > Could we reduce the amount of negatives? "disallow EFI reboot method on EFI platforms without runtime services"
>>> On 10.01.17 at 02:24, <cardoe@cardoe.com> wrote: > On 12/7/16 7:18 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 05.12.16 at 23:25, <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote: >>> ..nor EFI platforms with runtime services enabled. >> >> Btw, was the title meant to read "... neither on non-EFI platforms ..."? > > Could we reduce the amount of negatives? > > "disallow EFI reboot method on EFI platforms without runtime services" Well, you're a little late to the party - the patch did go in a month ago. Jan
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/shutdown.c b/xen/arch/x86/shutdown.c index 7a1a73a..55f6840 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/shutdown.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/shutdown.c @@ -80,6 +80,9 @@ static void __init set_reboot_type(char *str) break; str++; } + + if ( reboot_type == BOOT_EFI && !efi_enabled(EFI_RS) ) + reboot_type = BOOT_INVALID; } custom_param("reboot", set_reboot_type);