On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 15:33, Pete Batard <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Ard, > > On 2018.12.07 14:08, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 at 13:13, Pete Batard <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Preamble: > >> > >> Because of its price point, ease of use and availability, the Raspberry Pi > >> is > >> undeniably one of the most successful ARM platform in existence today. Its > >> widespread adoption therefore makes it a perfect fit as an EDK2 platform. > >> > >> However, up until now, the Raspberry Pi hasn't been supported as a bona > >> fide > >> platform in our repository. This series of patches remedies that by > >> introducing > >> the Raspberry Pi 3 Model B and Model B+ as a viable EDK2 platforms. > >> > > > > Thanks Pete, this is excellent work > > Well, most of it is based on your initial work for that platform... ;) >
That was just the easy part :-) > >> Patch Breakdown: > >> > >> Since this is a platform introduction, we simply chose to break the commits > >> into edk2-platforms and edk2-non-osi components, as we see little point in > >> splitting the series into further subcomponents, when the structure would > >> be > >> similar to the overall subdirectory layout and of course, one needs to > >> apply > >> all components at once to be able to test the firmware. > >> > > > > You will have to split it up, or i won't be able to review it. > > Do you have a preference with regards to breaking it down? > > Would a 4-way ACPI / Drivers / Library / Non-OSI work for you, or do you > want to go more fine grained? > Each module as a separate patch, preferably, and a patch that adds the .dsc/.fdf at the end. > I'm not sure what will make the reviewing process easier, so if you have > guidance as to how you'd prefer to see things split, I'll take it. > Well, I want to be able to reply inline in my email client, and a 22000 line patch does not let me do that ... > > BTW I managed to build the code with GCC 6 just fine - are you sure > > the GCC 5.5 limitation still exists? > > Well, the problem we've seen isn't with building the firmware itself, > but with getting sporadic (but not systematic) Synchronous Exceptions > during early boot, when using GCC 6 or later. > > After switching to GCC 5.5, I have not seen any of these exceptions > occur, so, even if we have applied other changes that may have helped > since, I prefer erring on the side of caution for the time being... > Yikes. So no meaningful backtraces were produced that narrow it down? _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
