>>> On 05.12.14 at 18:59, wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 05:00:52PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 05.12.14 at 17:40, wrote:
>> > On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 03:00:14PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> but I don't think this possibility of renaming warrants a much longer
>> >> discussion. Pleas
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 05:00:52PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 05.12.14 at 17:40, wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 03:00:14PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> but I don't think this possibility of renaming warrants a much longer
> >> discussion. Please also remember that renaming always imp
>>> On 05.12.14 at 17:40, wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 03:00:14PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> but I don't think this possibility of renaming warrants a much longer
>> discussion. Please also remember that renaming always implies more
>> cumbersome backporting, even if only slightly more.
>
>
On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 03:00:14PM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 05.12.14 at 15:51, wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 09:35:01AM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
> >> > 3) Should not we change xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.h to
> >> >xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.c? e
>>> On 05.12.14 at 15:51, wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 09:35:01AM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
>> > 3) Should not we change xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.h to
>> >xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.c? efi-boot.h contains more
>> >code than definitions, declarations and
On Thu, Dec 04, 2014 at 09:35:01AM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
> > Hey,
> >
> > 1) Why is there in EFI code so many functions (e.g. efi_start(),
> >efi_arch_edd(), ...) with local variables declared as a static?
> >Though some of them have also regular loca
On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 09:47 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 05.12.14 at 10:33, wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 07:37 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 04.12.14 at 22:22, wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> > On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
> >> >>> 3)
>>> On 05.12.14 at 10:33, wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 07:37 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 04.12.14 at 22:22, wrote:
>> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
>> >>> 3) Should not we change xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.h to
>> >>>xen/ar
On Fri, 2014-12-05 at 07:37 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 04.12.14 at 22:22, wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
> >>> 3) Should not we change xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.h to
> >>>xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.c? efi-boot.h contains
>>> On 04.12.14 at 22:22, wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
>>> 3) Should not we change xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.h to
>>>xen/arch/*/efi/efi-boot.c? efi-boot.h contains more
>>>code than definitions, declarations and short static
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> 1) Why is there in EFI code so many functions (e.g. efi_start(),
>>efi_arch_edd(), ...) with local variables declared as a static?
>>Though some of them have also regular local variables. I
>>> On 03.12.14 at 22:02, wrote:
> Hey,
>
> 1) Why is there in EFI code so many functions (e.g. efi_start(),
>efi_arch_edd(), ...) with local variables declared as a static?
>Though some of them have also regular local variables. I do not
>why it was decided that some of them must be
Hey,
1) Why is there in EFI code so many functions (e.g. efi_start(),
efi_arch_edd(), ...) with local variables declared as a static?
Though some of them have also regular local variables. I do not
why it was decided that some of them must be the static and
some of do not. It is a bit
13 matches
Mail list logo
