On 13.08.17 13:09, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
On 08/12/2017 03:37 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 05.08.17 22:32, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
efi_open_protocol and close_protocol have to keep track of
opened protocols.
So we add an array open_info to each protocol of each handle.
Cc: Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de>
---
v3:
use EFI_CALL to avoid wrapper for efi_disconnect_controller
use list_for_each_entry
move variable declarations out of loops
v2:
new patch
---
include/efi_loader.h | 1 +
lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c | 164
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
2 files changed, 155 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/efi_loader.h b/include/efi_loader.h
index 553c615f11..222b251a38 100644
--- a/include/efi_loader.h
+++ b/include/efi_loader.h
@@ -88,6 +88,7 @@ extern unsigned int __efi_runtime_rel_start,
__efi_runtime_rel_stop;
struct efi_handler {
const efi_guid_t *guid;
void *protocol_interface;
+ struct efi_open_protocol_info_entry open_info[4];
};
/*
diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
b/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
index ebb557abb2..e969814476 100644
--- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
+++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
@@ -898,23 +898,78 @@ static efi_status_t EFIAPI efi_connect_controller(
return EFI_EXIT(EFI_NOT_FOUND);
}
-static efi_status_t EFIAPI efi_disconnect_controller(void
*controller_handle,
- void *driver_image_handle,
- void *child_handle)
+static efi_status_t EFIAPI efi_disconnect_controller(
+ void *controller_handle,
+ void *driver_image_handle,
+ void *child_handle)
{
EFI_ENTRY("%p, %p, %p", controller_handle, driver_image_handle,
child_handle);
return EFI_EXIT(EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER);
}
+static efi_status_t efi_close_protocol_int(struct efi_handler
*protocol,
Please either wrap _ext or use EFI_CALL :).
Why?
Function efi_close_protocol_int is only used to avoid lines over 80
characters in efi_disconnect_controller. It is not called from anywhere
else.
Should I add some comment in the code or in the commit message?
Ah, now I see. No, I think the function name is misleading, so that
needs change :). How about efi_close_one_protocol()?
+ void *agent_handle,
+ void *controller_handle)
+{
+ size_t i;
+ struct efi_open_protocol_info_entry *open_info;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(protocol->open_info); ++i) {
+ open_info = &protocol->open_info[i];
+
+ if (!open_info->open_count)
+ continue;
+
+ if (open_info->agent_handle == agent_handle &&
+ open_info->controller_handle ==
+ controller_handle) {
+ open_info->open_count--;
+ return EFI_SUCCESS;
+ }
+ }
+ return EFI_NOT_FOUND;
+}
+
static efi_status_t EFIAPI efi_close_protocol(void *handle,
efi_guid_t *protocol,
void *agent_handle,
void *controller_handle)
{
+ struct efi_object *efiobj;
+ size_t i;
+ efi_status_t r = EFI_NOT_FOUND;
+
EFI_ENTRY("%p, %p, %p, %p", handle, protocol, agent_handle,
controller_handle);
- return EFI_EXIT(EFI_NOT_FOUND);
+
+ if (!handle || !protocol || !agent_handle) {
+ r = EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ EFI_PRINT_GUID("protocol:", protocol);
+
+ list_for_each_entry(efiobj, &efi_obj_list, link) {
+ if (efiobj->handle != handle)
+ continue;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(efiobj->protocols); i++) {
+ struct efi_handler *handler = &efiobj->protocols[i];
+ const efi_guid_t *hprotocol = handler->guid;
+ if (!hprotocol)
+ continue;
+ if (!guidcmp(hprotocol, protocol)) {
+ r = efi_close_protocol_int(handler,
+ agent_handle,
+ controller_handle);
+ goto out;
+ }
+ }
+ goto out;
+ }
+out:
+ return EFI_EXIT(r);
}
static efi_status_t EFIAPI
efi_open_protocol_information(efi_handle_t handle,
@@ -1119,6 +1174,96 @@ static void EFIAPI efi_set_mem(void *buffer,
unsigned long size, uint8_t value)
memset(buffer, value, size);
}
+static efi_status_t efi_open_protocol_int(
Same here.
Alex
See above.
Was the rest of the patch ok for you?
I didn't spot anything obviously bad, but that doesn't usually mean
much. My review foo isn't quite as good as others'. When applying I
would push the patches through some more detailed testing though.
Alex
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
