Hi Heinrich,
On 4 December 2017 at 15:12, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/04/2017 11:07 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>> Hi Heinrich,
>>
>> On 4 December 2017 at 14:53, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/04/2017 10:28 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
This jumps to test co
On 12/04/2017 11:07 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Heinrich,
On 4 December 2017 at 14:53, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
On 12/04/2017 10:28 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
This jumps to test code which can call directly into the EFI support. It
does not need a separate image so it is easy to write tests
Hi Heinrich,
On 4 December 2017 at 14:53, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>
>
> On 12/04/2017 10:28 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
>>
>> This jumps to test code which can call directly into the EFI support. It
>> does not need a separate image so it is easy to write tests with it.
>>
>> For now the test just
On 12/04/2017 10:28 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
This jumps to test code which can call directly into the EFI support. It
does not need a separate image so it is easy to write tests with it.
For now the test just outputs a message. To try it:
Hello Simon,
why do we need "bootefi test"?
What do yo
This jumps to test code which can call directly into the EFI support. It
does not need a separate image so it is easy to write tests with it.
For now the test just outputs a message. To try it:
./sandbox/u-boot -c "bootefi test"
U-Boot 2017.09-00204-g696c9855fe (Sep 17 2017 - 16:43:53 -0600)
DRA
5 matches
Mail list logo