Re: [GIT PULL] EFI urgent fixes

[Paul Bolle <pebolle-IWqWACnzNjzz+pZb47iToQ@public.gmane.org>]

On Fri, 2014-09-26 at 12:44 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Sep, at 01:27:34PM, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > 
> > This Makefile was changed in the first patch. That became 84be880560fb
> > ("Revert "efi/x86: efistub: Move shared dependencies to <asm/efi.h>""),
> > which just landed in next-20140926.
> > 
> > It appears to have introduced a typo, because:
> >     CONFIG_EFI_ARM_STUB
> > 
> > should probably have been:
> >     CONFIG_EFI_ARMSTUB
> 
> Crap. Thanks for catching that Paul. I'm wondering how this slipped
> through because that commit has an explicit Tested-by from Leif.
> 
> Hell, even I built an arm64 EFI kernel before sending that commit.
> 
> Ohh.. I see why no one caught this. From arch/arm64/Makefile,
> 
>   libs-$(CONFIG_EFI_STUB) += drivers/firmware/efi/libstub/
> 
> so libstub will be built for arm64 regardless of the broken logic in
> drivers/firmware/efi/Makefile.
> 
> Paul, how did you notice the typo? Did you hit an explicit build
> failure? It's definitely wrong and I'm trying to figure out whether I
> need to add some more testing to my build infrastructure to catch this
> kind of problem in the future.

I have a 800 line perl monster that checks for stuff like this. It's not
very sophisticated but smart enough to spot typos like this one. I try
to have it check each linux-next (and mainline) release.

(I think Valentin Rothberg is trying to automate this properly. See
http://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2014/ocw/sessions/1863 .)

> The next question is: should we fix this up at this point in the merge
> cycle? It's basically just dead code.


Paul Bolle