On Mon, 27 Jun, at 12:49:20PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > The other weirdness is the misalignment of the '0xe' portion here: > > #define LINUX_EFI_ARM_SCREEN_INFO_TABLE_GUID EFI_GUID(0xe03fc20a, 0x85dc, > 0x406e, 0xb9, 0xe, 0x4a, 0xb5, 0x02, 0x37, 0x1d, 0x95) > #define LINUX_EFI_LOADER_ENTRY_GUID EFI_GUID(0x4a67b082, 0x0a4c, > 0x41cf, 0xb6, 0xc7, 0x44, 0x0b, 0x29, 0xbb, 0x8c, 0x4f) > > Am I correct that LINUX_EFI_ARM_SCREEN_INFO_TABLE_GUID is purely Linux kernel > internal, and that we can write 0xe as 0x0e? Yep, you're correct.
> The patch below implements this organization of the GUIDs on top of your > patch. > > Also note that it should still be easy to line up these lines with the spec, > as I > left an extra space before the 'byte' portion of the table, so the table is > separated into two areas visually. Looks fine to me, and so did Joe's checkpatch patch.
