On Saturday 11 January 2014, Leif Lindholm wrote: > diff --git a/init/main.c b/init/main.c > index febc511..1331829 100644 > --- a/init/main.c > +++ b/init/main.c > @@ -905,6 +905,10 @@ static noinline void __init kernel_init_freeable(void) > smp_prepare_cpus(setup_max_cpus); > > do_pre_smp_initcalls(); > + > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM) && efi_enabled(EFI_BOOT)) > + efi_enter_virtual_mode(); What is the dependency on CONFIG_ARM here? Wouldn't most other architectures need the same? I'd rather not see this turn into a long list of CONFIG_$(ARCH) checks if other architectures enable it in the same place. I also wonder why the three architectures implementing it all call this from wildly different places during init/main.c, namely (very early) setup_arch() on ia64, (relatively early) start_kernel on x86 and (relatively late) kernel_init_freeable on arm. In general, I'd be happy with adding this as late in the startup code as possible, but it may be better to use the same place as x86 in order to avoid surprises with unexpected dependencies. One such dependency that may cause problems is the fact that we (try to) call efi_late_init() before efi_enter_virtual_mode() now. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
