Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 12/19] efi: introduce EFI_RS to ease control on runtime services usage

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 06.08.16 at 01:04, <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Apart from the question of this probably better getting merged with
the previous patch ...

> --- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> +++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> @@ -936,6 +936,10 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE 
> *SystemTable)
>  
>      __set_bit(EFI_BOOT, &efi.flags);
>  
> +#ifndef CONFIG_ARM /* Disabled until runtime services implemented. */
> +    __set_bit(EFI_RS, &efi.flags);
> +#endif

... this needs to be paralleled by a __clear_bit() when "efi=no-rs"
was given (and then efi_rs_enable) should go away. Oh, looks
like that's the next patch, but I'd then again question the split.

> --- a/xen/include/xen/efi.h
> +++ b/xen/include/xen/efi.h
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>  struct efi {
>      unsigned long flags;        /* Bit fields representing available EFI 
> features/properties */
>  #define EFI_BOOT     0       /* Were we booted from EFI? */
> +#define EFI_RS               2       /* Can we use runtime services? */

Why is this not the sequentially next number?

Jan


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