On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 1:12 PM Stefan Reinauer
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 20 Jun 2019 08:26, ron minnich wrote:
>
> clang-format is not a textual preprocessor. It is basically the ast
> builder of followed by output.
>
> So in your case, I just tried it
> main() {
>
> if (foo)
> bar();
>
A new post titled "[GSoC] Coreboot Coverity, week 4" has been published on the coreboot blog. Find the full post at https://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2019/06/20/gsoc-coreboot-coverity-week-4/
Hello again! If you recall from my last post, the schedule this week is to fix the issues in
Hello,
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 9:05 PM Marshall Dawson
wrote:
>> My wild guess is that AMD
>> needed some time to remake IOMMU for 16h to function together with AMD
>> PSP (Platform Security Processor), and maybe they intended to
>> implement PSP at early 16h as well - but it wasn't ready in
Am Do., 20. Juni 2019 um 21:47 Uhr schrieb Nico Huber :
> That's all true, but it forces an order of the tools you run. e.g.
> don't integrate clang-format into your editor because it might hide
> the problem before the compiler can warn you.
>
So don't integrate clang-format into your editor
On 20 Jun 2019 08:26, ron minnich wrote:clang-format is not a textual preprocessor. It is basically the ast
builder of followed by output.
So in your case, I just tried it
main() {
if (foo)
bar();
baz();
}
and got the right thing, i.e. braces around bar but not baz.
The
On 20.06.19 17:26, ron minnich wrote:
> clang-format is not a textual preprocessor. It is basically the ast
> builder of followed by output.
>
> So in your case, I just tried it
> main() {
>
> if (foo)
> bar();
> baz();
> }
>
> and got the right thing, i.e. braces around bar but not baz.
On 20.06.19 18:12, Jacob Garber wrote:
> What Ron said, plus if I recall Coverity has a lint for misleading
> indentation, so
> I don't think there are any current instances of this in the code base. In
> fact,
> GCC even has -Wmisleading-indentation that was added to -Wall in GCC 6, so we
>
Hi Mike,
I'm nearly certain that APU (Family 16h Models 00-0Fh aka Kabini) didn't
have a usable IOMMU. It was fused away.
So: after 15h - which had IOMMU...
>
FWIW, not all Family 15h did either. That's the type of feature that could
be specified or removed for different SKUs. For example in
I tried force enabling IOMMU for ASUS AM1I-A by changing
" #define BLDCFG_IOMMU_SUPPORT FALSE "
to TRUE at ./src/mainboard/asus/am1i-a/buildOpts.c and adding
" device pci 0.2 on end # IOMMU "
line to ./src/mainboard/asus/am1i-a/devicetree.cb :
device domain 0 on
What Ron said, plus if I recall Coverity has a lint for misleading indentation,
so
I don't think there are any current instances of this in the code base. In fact,
GCC even has -Wmisleading-indentation that was added to -Wall in GCC 6, so we
should currently be ok. That being said, these warnings
clang-format is not a textual preprocessor. It is basically the ast
builder of followed by output.
So in your case, I just tried it
main() {
if (foo)
bar();
baz();
}
and got the right thing, i.e. braces around bar but not baz.
The history of reviewers looking at code is they miss
Hi all,
We're developing a new board based in the AMD Prairie Falcon and the closest
coreboot is from amd/gardenia.
We're using coreboot verion 4.9.
Now we have console but we have a reset loop once the 'AmdInitPost' from
src/soc/amd/common/block/pi/agesawrapper.c
is called. I've modified
On 20.06.19 06:01, Jacob Garber wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 08:38:14PM -0700, ron minnich wrote:
>> Given the number of serious problems that lack of braces causes, I
>> like this proposal. It's indicative that both Rust and Go require the
>> {}, for reasons of safety.
>
> There was a famous
13 matches
Mail list logo
