| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <87d3b2040702010010h7534cc9cte1605e5cecd56025@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2007 09:10:10 +0100 From: "Frederic Riss" <frederic.riss@...il.com> To: "bibo,mao" <bibo_mao@...ux.intel.com> Cc: "Bjorn Helgaas" <bjorn.helgaas@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, artiom.myaskouvskey@...el.com, akpm@...l.org, "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] EFI x86: pass firmware call parameters on the stack 2007/2/1, bibo,mao <bibo_mao@...ux.intel.com>: > currently x86_64 kernel does not support efi, efi convention comply to > MS convention. On ia32 parameter is passed on stack, on x86_64 parameter > is passed by registers but that is different from x86_64 linux convention. Is an x86_64 EFI firmware required to have 2 entry points, one x86_64 and one in ia32 mode ? If that's not the case, it means that an i386 kernel won't be able to work correctly on an EFI powered x86_64 box... > How about adding EFIAPI prefix before efi runtime service function, this > prefix has different definition in different architecture. Have you any objection to the second patch I posted? It's not only a matter of passing arguments, ia64 does quite a lot of things in its wrapper functions. I can easily imagine that such additional work could be added in the i386 wrappers if EFI becomes more widely used. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists