Re: [PATCH V3 07/10] Secure boot: Add a dummy kernel parameter that will switch on Secure Boot mode
From: Josh Boyer <hidden>
Date: 2012-10-30 17:49:00
Also in:
lkml
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 05:00:06PM +0800, joeyli wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Hi Josh, Tahashi has a good idea for use strtobool to allow 'secureboot_enable=yes' works. Please consider the following change. Thanks a lot! Joey Leequoted
From f6841a476f3d332fe7b04cb716e0b518cccd5055 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001From: Lee, Chun-Yi <jlee@suse.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 16:36:57 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] efi: more user-friendly secureboot_enable parameter From: Takashi Iwai <redacted> Use strtobool can allow 'secureboot_enable=yes', it's more user-friendly. Signed-off-by: Lee, Chun-Yi <jlee@suse.com> --- kernel/cred.c | 5 +++-- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/kernel/cred.c b/kernel/cred.c index 3f5be65..70897a2 100644 --- a/kernel/cred.c +++ b/kernel/cred.c@@ -633,9 +633,10 @@ void __init secureboot_enable() /* Dummy Secure Boot enable option to fake out UEFI SB=1 */ static int __init secureboot_enable_opt(char *str) { - int sb_enable = !!simple_strtol(str, NULL, 0); - if (sb_enable) + bool sb_enable; + if (!strtobool(str, &sb_enable) && sb_enable) secureboot_enable(); + return 1; } __setup("secureboot_enable=", secureboot_enable_opt);
This seems like a good change to me. If you don't mind, I'll rework the existing patch to do this since it hasn't been accepted upstream yet and give Takashi-san and you appropriate credit in the commit log. josh