On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de wrote:
On 10/04/2017 04:14 PM, Rob Clark wrote:
On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 9:03 AM, Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de wrote:
Queued and signaled describe boolean states of events. So let's use type bool and rename the structure members to is_queued and is_signaled.
Update the comments for is_queued and is_signaled.
Reviewed-by: Rob Clark robdclark@gmail.com
It would be kinda nice to merge my efi_event fixes and rework to use an arbitrary sized list of events before making too many more efi_event changes, since that is kind of annoying to keep rebasing ;-)
BR, -R
I would not mind if you patch went first.
But your patch https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/812967/ is not applicable to U-Boot master and needs rebasing anyway.
jfyi, I have it (and other pending patches) rebased on latest master (as of ~yesterday) here:
https://github.com/robclark/u-boot/commits/wip-enough-uefi-for-shell
I wasn't planning on resending until I get further with FAT write stuff (currently on a local branch, although I might not get much time to work on in the next week or two).. although I can re-send it or any of the other patches to get Shell.efi working if wanted. (Note that I'm also using your patch for efi watchdog support, that was one of the other required bits.)
Not sure what agraf's plan is but I think the needed bits for Shell.efi are mergable already.
Please, add the missing check that the event pointer is valid. The EFI code checks other arguments rigorously so we should do the same for pointers. It would be very hard to debug a problem in an EFI application otherwise.
I'm a bit undecided on this, since we have other places where there is no good way to check the validity of a pointer. (For example file or disk objects.) I was thinking about perhaps implementing a compile-time optional feature using a hashtable to map objects to type so we can add in some type checking, at the expense of extra runtime overhead. Probably not something you'd want to ship enabled, but it would be useful for debugging.
BR, -R
@Alexander I guess with Suseconf you were quite busy in the last weeks. Did you already make up your mind in which sequence we should prepare the EFI patches?
The following of my patches could be directly applied to efi-next:
[U-Boot,1/1] efi_selftest: enable CONFIG_CMD_BOOTEFI_SELFTEST https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/816412/ [U-Boot,1/1] efi_loader: replace efi_div10 by div64_u64 https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/820731/ [U-Boot,1/1] efi_selftest: use efi_st_error for all error messages https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/821237/ [U-Boot,1/1] efi_loader: use type bool for event states https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/821302/ [U-Boot,v2,1/1] efi_selftest: make tests easier to read https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/821306/
I guess Rob was refering to [U-Boot,1/1] efi_loader: use type bool for event states
Best regards
Heinrich