From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753179AbcD2JyJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Apr 2016 05:54:09 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:36423 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753083AbcD2JyG (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Apr 2016 05:54:06 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 11:53:56 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: jeremy.compostella@intel.com, stefan.stanacar@intel.com, matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, bp@alien8.de, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org Cc: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip:efi/core] efibc: Add EFI Bootloader Control module Message-ID: <20160429095356.GA29957@gmail.com> References: <1461614832-17633-26-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * tip-bot for Compostella, Jeremy wrote: > Commit-ID: 06f7d4a1618dbb086e738c93cd1ef416ab01027d > Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/06f7d4a1618dbb086e738c93cd1ef416ab01027d > Author: Compostella, Jeremy > AuthorDate: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 21:06:57 +0100 > Committer: Ingo Molnar > CommitDate: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 11:34:02 +0200 > > efibc: Add EFI Bootloader Control module > > This module installs a reboot callback, such that if reboot() is invoked > with a string argument NNN, "NNN" is copied to the "LoaderEntryOneShot" > EFI variable, to be read by the bootloader. > drivers/firmware/efi/Kconfig | 15 +++++++ > drivers/firmware/efi/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/firmware/efi/efibc.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/efi.h | 4 ++ > 4 files changed, 121 insertions(+) So this bloated things a bit on 32-bit x86 allyesconfig kernels, we now have this new warning: drivers/firmware/efi/efibc.c:53:1: warning: the frame size of 2256 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=] 2K of stack use for a function is quite excessive, can we improve the stack footprint of this code? Thanks, Ingo