[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXF62pbmBXmW3BhGAKMG3TrR2KTNuCXcZJ2akuPJXfTrvw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 22:42:47 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] efi/libstub: efi_info/efi_err message neatening
On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 22:40, Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 09:29:46PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 21:12, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Use a standard style for these output logging messages.
> > >
> > > Miscellanea:
> > >
> > > o Use more common macro #defines with fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__
> > > 0 Remove trailing messages periods and odd ' uses
> > > o Remove embedded function names and use %s, __func__
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Perhaps these trivialities on top of this series?
> > >
> >
> > The EFI printing routines don't actually support format strings.
> >
>
> The x86 real-mode bootup code actually has a printf.o that clocks in at
> under 2k. We could add it in, and it would also be nice to move it into
> lib or something, since at least alpha and powerpc implement something
> very similar for boot-time messages.
Not being able to use format strings is really quite annoying, and I
did look into reusing the ordinary one (which is hairy), not realizing
that there is already a cut down version available.
So yes, that does sound like a great idea!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists