[U-Boot] [PATCH 4/4] efi_loader: indent entry/exit prints to show nesting level

Alexander Graf
2017-07-28T09:36:43Z

On 28.07.17 11:34, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 5:25 AM, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28.07.17 11:19, Rob Clark wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 3:24 AM, Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 27.07.17 14:04, Rob Clark wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This should make it easier to see when a callback back to UEFI world
>>>>> calls back in to the u-boot world, and generally match up EFI_ENTRY()
>>>>> and EFI_EXIT() calls.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't the previous patch ensure that we're always only going 1 level
>>>> deep?
>>>
>>>
>>> two separate counters for nesting and entry level. We can be more
>>> deeply nested when EFI_CALL() is used :-)
>>
>>
>> Ah, so this basically gives you the EFI_CALL nesting level? Wouldn't it make
>> sense to also increase the nesting level on every application invocation?
>
> I specifically avoided that since (at least at what I was looking at)
> each successive application invocation never returns.
>
> Maybe instead we should just do something like:
> debug("========================================\n") to show the
> application invocation boundaries more easily?

Sounds like a good idea to me :). Ideally with a bit more information
such as the file path.

>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> include/efi_loader.h | 12 ++++++++----
>>>>> lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>> 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/include/efi_loader.h b/include/efi_loader.h
>>>>> index 4262d0ac6b..037cc7c543 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/efi_loader.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/efi_loader.h
>>>>> @@ -17,13 +17,16 @@
>>>>> int __efi_entry_check(void);
>>>>> int __efi_exit_check(void);
>>>>> +const char *__efi_nesting_inc(void);
>>>>> +const char *__efi_nesting_dec(void);
>>>>> /*
>>>>> * Enter the u-boot world from UEFI:
>>>>> */
>>>>> #define EFI_ENTRY(format, ...) do { \
>>>>> assert(__efi_entry_check()); \
>>>>> - debug("EFI: Entry %s(" format ")\n", __func__, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
>>>>> + debug("%sEFI: Entry %s(" format ")\n", __efi_nesting_inc(), \
>>>>> + __func__, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
>>>>> } while(0)
>>>>> /*
>>>>> @@ -31,7 +34,8 @@ int __efi_exit_check(void);
>>>>> */
>>>>> #define EFI_EXIT(ret) ({ \
>>>>> efi_status_t _r = ret; \
>>>>> - debug("EFI: Exit: %s: %u\n", __func__, (u32)(_r &
>>>>> ~EFI_ERROR_MASK)); \
>>>>> + debug("%sEFI: Exit: %s: %u\n", __efi_nesting_dec(), \
>>>>> + __func__, (u32)(_r & ~EFI_ERROR_MASK)); \
>>>>> assert(__efi_exit_check()); \
>>>>> _r; \
>>>>> })
>>>>> @@ -40,11 +44,11 @@ int __efi_exit_check(void);
>>>>> * Callback into UEFI world from u-boot:
>>>>> */
>>>>> #define EFI_CALL(exp) do { \
>>>>> - debug("EFI: Call: %s\n", #exp); \
>>>>> + debug("%sEFI: Call: %s\n", __efi_nesting_inc(), #exp); \
>>>>> assert(__efi_exit_check()); \
>>>>> exp; \
>>>>> assert(__efi_entry_check()); \
>>>>> - debug("EFI: Return From: %s\n", #exp); \
>>>>> + debug("%sEFI: Return From: %s\n", __efi_nesting_dec(), #exp); \
>>>>> } while(0)
>>>>> extern struct efi_runtime_services efi_runtime_services;
>>>>> diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
>>>>> b/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
>>>>> index 66137d4ff9..de338f009c 100644
>>>>> --- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
>>>>> +++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
>>>>> @@ -50,6 +50,7 @@ static volatile void *efi_gd, *app_gd;
>>>>> #endif
>>>>> static int entry_count;
>>>>> +static int nesting_level;
>>>>> /* Called on every callback entry */
>>>>> int __efi_entry_check(void)
>>>>> @@ -96,6 +97,28 @@ void efi_restore_gd(void)
>>>>> #endif
>>>>> }
>>>>> +/*
>>>>> + * Two spaces per indent level, maxing out at 10.. which ought to be
>>>>> + * enough for anyone ;-)
>>>>> + */
>>>>> +static const char *indent_string(int level)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> + static const char *indent = " ";
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There's no need for this to be static, no?
>>>
>>>
>>> I suppose it doesn't *need* to be.. but it also doesn't need to have
>>> scope outside the file, and usually static is a good hint to the
>>> compiler to inline it. (If non-static the compiler needs to emit a
>>> non-inlined version of it since it doesn't know it won't be called
>>> outside of this object file.
>>
>>
>> I don't mean the function, I mean the indent. If you do
>>
>> static const char *indent = <const value>;
>>
>> it should be practically the same as
>>
>> const char *indent = <const value>;
>>
>> no?
>
> hmm, I didn't want the compiler to instantiate the array on the stack.
> But I suppose I need to check the generated asm to see how clever it
> is.

It really shouldn't do that. As long as you're just juggling pointers to
a region in .rodata it should know exactly what's going on.

Alex