From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Graf Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 01:16:28 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 00/14] EFI payload / application support v2 In-Reply-To: References: <1452834380-164453-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de> <56AE8011.6050802@suse.de> <56AFD04C.3040104@suse.de> Message-ID: <56AFF55C.4000809@suse.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 02/02/2016 01:02 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Alex, > > On 1 February 2016 at 14:38, Alexander Graf wrote: > >>>>> For now I've had a play with Minnowboard, which is x86. The main thing >>>>> I noticed is that the API function implements should have EFIAPI on >>>>> them also. >>>> >>>> Yes :). I didn't expect anyone to actually care about running this on x86 >>>> which is the only architecture that has different calling conventions for >>>> EFI. I'm very pleasantly surprised that you are interested and since you >>>> already have a patch to add them, I guess you can as well just post that >>>> once the base support is in :). >>> OK. I suppose because EFIAPI is empty on ARM it doesn't matter. But >>> strictly speaking the declaration should match the implementation. >> >> Yeah, I just didn't want to implement something I wouldn't test :). > OK. You could add a regparm(0) or something like that to be sure it is > working. Or just bring in that part of my patch. But I'm OK if you'd > rather I send a follow-up. My AArch64 compiler isn't really happy about that: include/efi_loader.h:67:4: warning: 'regparm' attribute directive ignored [-Wattributes] But I've fixed up everything I could find manually and just leave the remaining 1 or 2 occurrences to you :) Alex