On Tue, 25 Mar, at 03:47:23PM, Roy Franz wrote:
>
> I have sent a patch (attempted to reply using git-send-email) that
> adds the macro for x86 and updates efi-stub-helper.c. If you could
> add this to your series for 3.15 that would be great, as then we would
> not have any x86 changes in the
On Tue, 25 Mar, at 03:47:23PM, Roy Franz wrote:
I have sent a patch (attempted to reply using git-send-email) that
adds the macro for x86 and updates efi-stub-helper.c. If you could
add this to your series for 3.15 that would be great, as then we would
not have any x86 changes in the ARM
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Roy Franz wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Mar, at 05:52:29PM, Roy Franz wrote:
>>>
>>> For both arm32 and arm64 the Linux and EFI calling conventions are the
>>> same, so we are directly invoking the function pointers
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Roy Franz roy.fr...@linaro.org wrote:
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Matt Fleming m...@console-pimps.org wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar, at 05:52:29PM, Roy Franz wrote:
For both arm32 and arm64 the Linux and EFI calling conventions are the
same, so we are directly
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Mar, at 05:52:29PM, Roy Franz wrote:
>>
>> For both arm32 and arm64 the Linux and EFI calling conventions are the
>> same, so we are directly invoking the function pointers in the
>> boot_services table. This gives us type
On Fri, 21 Mar, at 05:52:29PM, Roy Franz wrote:
>
> For both arm32 and arm64 the Linux and EFI calling conventions are the
> same, so we are directly invoking the function pointers in the
> boot_services table. This gives us type checking of those calls,
> which is nice.The efi_call_physN macros
On Fri, 21 Mar, at 05:52:29PM, Roy Franz wrote:
For both arm32 and arm64 the Linux and EFI calling conventions are the
same, so we are directly invoking the function pointers in the
boot_services table. This gives us type checking of those calls,
which is nice.The efi_call_physN macros for
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 4:05 AM, Matt Fleming m...@console-pimps.org wrote:
On Fri, 21 Mar, at 05:52:29PM, Roy Franz wrote:
For both arm32 and arm64 the Linux and EFI calling conventions are the
same, so we are directly invoking the function pointers in the
boot_services table. This gives us
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 5:14 AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> From: Matt Fleming
>
> It's not possible to dereference the EFI System table directly when
> booting a 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit EFI firmware because the size of
> pointers don't match.
>
> In preparation for supporting the above use case,
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 5:14 AM, Matt Fleming m...@console-pimps.org wrote:
From: Matt Fleming matt.flem...@intel.com
It's not possible to dereference the EFI System table directly when
booting a 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit EFI firmware because the size of
pointers don't match.
In preparation
From: Matt Fleming
It's not possible to dereference the EFI System table directly when
booting a 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit EFI firmware because the size of
pointers don't match.
In preparation for supporting the above use case, build a list of
function pointers on boot so that callers don't
From: Matt Fleming matt.flem...@intel.com
It's not possible to dereference the EFI System table directly when
booting a 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit EFI firmware because the size of
pointers don't match.
In preparation for supporting the above use case, build a list of
function pointers on boot so
12 matches
Mail list logo
