On 29.09.2021 13:30, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>
>
>> On 29 Sep 2021, at 08:50, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 28.09.2021 18:32, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/efi/efi-boot.h
>>> @@ -678,6 +678,12 @@ static void __init efi_arch_handle_module(const struct
>>> file *file,
>>> efi_bs->FreePool(ptr);
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int __init efi_arch_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle)
>>> +{
>>> + /* x86 doesn't support device tree boot */
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>
>> Every time I see this addition I'm getting puzzled. As a result I'm
>> afraid I now need to finally ask you to do something about this (and
>> I'm sorry for doing so only now). There would better be no notion of
>> DT in x86 code, and there would better also not be a need for
>> architectures not supporting DT to each supply such a stub. Instead
>> I think you want to put this stub in xen/common/efi/boot.c, inside a
>> suitable #ifdef.
>
> Sure I will enclose it in #ifdef CONFIG_ARM and remove the x86 stub.
Hmm, so you've taken my reply in way quite different from how it was
meant, albeit I can't see how the last sentence of what I've said could
be interpreted in this way. The more generic stub wants enclosing in
"#ifndef CONFIG_HAS_DEVICE_TREE" imo.
Jan
