From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755893Ab3KWNPZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Nov 2013 08:15:25 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:36735 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752018Ab3KWNPW (ORCPT ); Sat, 23 Nov 2013 08:15:22 -0500 Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2013 14:15:18 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Dave Young Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, mjg59@srcf.ucam.org, hpa@zytor.com, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, vgoyal@redhat.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, horms@verge.net.au, kexec@lists.infradead.org, greg@kroah.com, matt@console-pimps.org, toshi.kani@hp.com Subject: Re: [patch 5/9 v3] efi: export more efi table variable to sysfs Message-ID: <20131123131518.GC24148@pd.tnic> References: <20131121061704.363730447@dhcp-16-126.nay.redhat.com> <20131121061754.887381332@dhcp-16-126.nay.redhat.com> <20131121165742.GN26009@pd.tnic> <20131122024850.GC3874@dhcp-16-126.nay.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131122024850.GC3874@dhcp-16-126.nay.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:48:50AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > efi.config_table = (unsigned long)efi.systab->tables; > > efi.fw_vendor = (unsigned long)efi.systab->fw_vendor; > > efi.runtime = (unsigned long)efi.systab->runtime; > > Hmm, UEFI spec mentions the them like below so I use the order: I'm sure by now you know you should not really trust the UEFI spec, or any other spec for that matter :) > Several fields of the EFI System Table must be converted from > physical pointers to virtual pointers using the ConvertPointer() > service. These fields include FirmwareVendor, RuntimeServices, > and ConfigurationTable. > > But since you like the reverse I can change it in next version. The reverse was simply a suggestion. The vertical alignment was more what I aimed at because it makes this chunk much more readable IMO. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --