Hi Heinrich,
On 15 September 2017 at 00:48, Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de wrote:
On 08/31/2017 02:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
On 27 August 2017 at 06:53, Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de wrote:
Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de
include/efi_api.h | 22 ++++++++ include/efi_loader.h | 1 + lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c | 119 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 3 files changed, 141 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
Please see below.
diff --git a/include/efi_api.h b/include/efi_api.h index 8efc8dfab8..b2838125d7 100644 --- a/include/efi_api.h +++ b/include/efi_api.h @@ -609,4 +609,26 @@ struct efi_pxe { struct efi_pxe_mode *mode; };
+#define EFI_DRIVER_BINDING_PROTOCOL_GUID \
EFI_GUID(0x18a031ab, 0xb443, 0x4d1a,\0xa5, 0xc0, 0x0c, 0x09, 0x26, 0x1e, 0x9f, 0x71)+struct efi_driver_binding_protocol {
efi_status_t (EFIAPI * supported)(I think the * should be up against 'supported'. Similarly below.
This is what checkpatch wants to see. Your suggestion leads to
ERROR: need consistent spacing around '*' (ctx:WxV) #25: FILE: include/efi_api.h:616:
efi_status_t (EFIAPI *supported)(So I prefer not change this before checkpatch.pl is not giving a different result.
OK I see. I suppose the EFIAPI is confusing it.
struct efi_driver_binding_protocol *this,efi_handle_t controller_handle,struct efi_device_path *remaining_device_path);efi_status_t (EFIAPI * start)(struct efi_driver_binding_protocol *this,efi_handle_t controller_handle,struct efi_device_path *remaining_device_path);efi_status_t (EFIAPI * stop)(struct efi_driver_binding_protocol *this,efi_handle_t controller_handle,UINTN number_of_children,efi_handle_t child_handle_buffer);These should have function comments.
u32 version;efi_handle_t image_handle;efi_handle_t driver_binding_handle;+};
#endif diff --git a/include/efi_loader.h b/include/efi_loader.h index 9c68246c7c..f9f33e1d01 100644 --- a/include/efi_loader.h +++ b/include/efi_loader.h @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ extern const struct efi_device_path_to_text_protocol efi_device_path_to_text;
extern const efi_guid_t efi_guid_console_control; extern const efi_guid_t efi_guid_device_path; +extern const efi_guid_t efi_guid_driver_binding_protocol;
comment for this?
The GUIDs are defined in the UEFI spec. So maybe we should just put a comment above all of these.
I know what a GUID is (or can look up efi_guid_t to find out) but not what these variables are for.
Regards, Simon