On 03/02/18 at 01:46pm, Simon Horman wrote: > On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 01:32:52PM +0100, Michal Suchánek wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Mar 2018 17:24:19 +0800 > > Dave Young <dyo...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > On 02/26/18 at 01:00pm, Michal Suchanek wrote: > > > > Not all architectures implement KEXEC_FILE_LOAD. However, on some > > > > archiectures KEXEC_FILE_LOAD is required when secure boot is > > > > enabled in locked-down mode. Previously users had to select the > > > > KEXEC_FILE_LOAD syscall with undocumented -s option. However, if > > > > they did pass the option kexec would fail on architectures that do > > > > not support it. > > > > > > > > When no option is passed to select one syscall or the other try > > > > KEXEC_FILE_LOAD and fall back to KEXEC_LOAD when not suported. > > > > > > Again, IMHO the default behavior should not be changed.. > > > > So adding a new option to enable the fallback would be ok? > > I am also wary of changing the default behaviour and > I think a new fallback option would be better. > > Dave?
Simon, I have same feeling, and a new option looks good to me as well Thanks Dave _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list firstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec