Hi Ilias, On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 at 01:40, Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodi...@linaro.org> wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > [...] > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (no changes since v1) > > > > > > > > > > > > What about > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/u-boot/caflsztjlakayk_jlxj7z571l-qmtoiqe-oxhcrs186dz2qo...@mail.gmail.com/ > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > > > Yes, I reordered the patches in this series. > > > > > > > > You don't need to reorder them. As Heinrich already pointed out some > > > > of these functions are used in EFI protocols. e.g > > > > duplicate_device_path() requires the memory to be allocated by EFI > > > > memory services, you can't just replace it with malloc. > > > > > > The pointers returned can be freed with EFI services. I don't see any > > > problem here. All the tests pass and all the spec rules are followed, > > > so far as I can tell. > > > > Where exactly does that happen in the current patch? > > > > efi_alloc() calls efi_allocate_pool() and when we need to free the > > device path we are calling efi_free_pool() > > > > Looking at it again, this wasn't very clear. The previous patch converts > efi_allocate_pool() to use malloc. So this patch is not needed at all
That's right, but ultimately I'd like to drop efi_alloc() and the only other place it is used is once in lib/efi_loader/efi_bootmgr.c Regards, Simon
