Re: [PATCH v3 09/16] efi: explicitly define efi struct in xen/arch/x86/efi/stub.c

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>]

>>> On 06.07.16 at 12:27, <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 12:55:42AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 05.07.16 at 20:33, <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 02:16:09AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 25.05.16 at 18:45, <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 01:03:42AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >> >>> On 15.04.16 at 14:33, <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/efi/stub.c
>> >> >> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/efi/stub.c
>> >> >> > @@ -8,6 +8,14 @@
>> >> >> >  const bool_t efi_enabled = 0;
>> >> >> >  #endif
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > +struct efi __read_mostly efi = {
>> >> >> > +	.acpi    = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR,
>> >> >> > +	.acpi20  = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR,
>> >> >> > +	.mps     = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR,
>> >> >> > +	.smbios  = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR,
>> >> >> > +	.smbios3 = EFI_INVALID_TABLE_ADDR
>> >> >> > +};
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I don't view duplicating this here as a good approach - you'd better
>> >> >> move the existing instance elsewhere. If this was a temporary thing
>> >> >> (until a later patch), it might be acceptable, but since building without
>> >> >> EFI support will need to remain an option (for people using older tool
>> >> >> chains), I don't expect a later patch to remove this.
>> >> >
>> >> > Do you think about separate C file which should contain efi struct
>> >> > and should be included in stub.c and runtime.c? Or anything else?
>> >>
>> >> A separate file seems to be overkill. Just move it to some other
>> >> existing file; I'm sure some sensible place can be found.
>> >
>> > This solution is not perfect, however, I cannot find better place for
>> > efi struct. If you have one then drop me a line.
>>
>> common/kernel.c or common/lib.c.
> 
> This means that we must delete efi struct initialization from
> xen/common/efi/runtime.c and xen/arch/x86/efi/stub.c and put
> it in one of both files mentioned by you. Is it OK for you?

Note how in my original reply I said "move the existing instance
elsewhere".

Jan


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