Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V4 05/15] Add efi_arch_cfg_file() to handle arch specific cfg file fields

[Roy Franz <roy.franz@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 10.09.14 at 02:51, <roy.franz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> @@ -752,6 +758,9 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE 
>> *SystemTable)
>>      }
>>      if ( !name.s )
>>          blexit(L"No Dom0 kernel image specified.");
>> +
>> +    efi_arch_cfg_file(dir_handle, section.s);
>> +
>>      split_value(name.s);
>>      read_file(dir_handle, s2w(&name), &kernel);
>>      efi_bs->FreePool(name.w);
>> @@ -769,17 +778,6 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE 
>> *SystemTable)
>>          efi_bs->FreePool(name.w);
>>      }
>>
>> -    name.s = get_value(&cfg, section.s, "ucode");
>> -    if ( !name.s )
>> -        name.s = get_value(&cfg, "global", "ucode");
>> -    if ( name.s )
>> -    {
>> -        microcode_set_module(mbi.mods_count);
>> -        split_value(name.s);
>> -        read_file(dir_handle, s2w(&name), &ucode);
>> -        efi_bs->FreePool(name.w);
>> -    }
>> -
>>      name.s = get_value(&cfg, section.s, "xsm");
>>      if ( name.s )
>>      {
>
> While the ordering shouldn't matter that much, is it intentional that
> you move this up ahead of the loading of the kernel? If anything,
> I'd see this move down after the XSM loading.
>
> Jan
>
Yes, this is intentional, as in the ARM case the configuration file specifies
the device tree to use, and the kernel and other modules are added to this,
so we need this set up before we actually read the other module files.  For x86
the ordering didn't seem to have any dependencies. I can add a comment
explaining this.

Roy

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel