grub-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v9 02/11] Unify GUID types


From: Ard Biesheuvel
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/11] Unify GUID types
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 13:42:59 +0200

On Wed, 13 Sept 2023 at 13:42, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko
<phcoder@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Le mer. 13 sept. 2023, 12:33, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org> a écrit :
>>
>> On Wed, 13 Sept 2023 at 12:18, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
>> <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Oliver!
>> >
>> > On Wed, 2023-09-13 at 12:14 +0200, Oliver Steffen wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 6:10 AM Pedro Miguel Justo <pmsjt@texair.net> 
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > I can confirm that, taking [1][2] and making [3] on top of it, my 
>> > > > Montvale-based rx2660 machine still boots fine.
>> > >
>> > > Wonderful! Thanks for testing!
>> >
>> > Are you going to submit a patch to fix the issue with the new information?
>> >
>> > Would be great if the bug could be fixed before the 2.12 release.
>> >
>>
>> Yes, this needs to be fixed. The EFI GUID type should not have the
>> packed attribute in the general case, only in places where it could
>> really appear misaligned (e.g., in device path nodes), although I
>> suspect that adding the packed attribute to the outer struct would be
>> sufficient there (given that the guid struct has no internal padding
>> so the attribute only affects its minimum alignment)
>>
>> E.g,
>>
>> struct grub_efi_vendor_device_path
>> {
>>   grub_efi_device_path_t header;
>>   grub_guid_t vendor_guid;
>>   grub_efi_uint8_t vendor_defined_data[0];
>> } GRUB_PACKED;
>
> Tried this. Compiler doesn't allow it

Tried what exactly? This is just copy/paste from the existing tree



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]