On Tue, 2016-08-30 at 11:15 -0700, Linn Crosetto wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 01:30:44PM -0700, Linn Crosetto wrote: > > > > On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 10:22:52PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > > > > Control: tag -1 pending > > > > > > Applied, but: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/fdt.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/fdt.c > > > > @@ -139,6 +139,13 @@ efi_status_t update_fdt(efi_system_table_t > > > > *sys_table, void *orig_fdt, > > > > return efi_status; > > > > } > > > > } > > > > + > > > > + fdt_val32 = efi_get_secureboot(sys_table); > > > > > > Shouldn't there be a cpu_to_fdt32() conversion here? > > > > Yes. When setting securelevel the check to see if secure_boot is > > greater-than-zero behaves the same, but it should be byte-swapped > > to preserve > > the value returned by efi_get_secureboot(). I tested and validated > > the > > following change: > > > > @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ efi_status_t update_fdt(efi_system_table_t > > *sys_table, void *orig_fdt, > > } > > } > > > > - fdt_val32 = efi_get_secureboot(sys_table); > > + fdt_val32 = cpu_to_fdt32(efi_get_secureboot(sys_table)); > > status = fdt_setprop(fdt, node, "linux,uefi-secure-boot", > > &fdt_val32, sizeof(fdt_val32)); > > if (status) > > Attaching version 2 of the patches with the change.
This change is pending for the next unstable upload. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
