Hi Bin, On 23 July 2015 at 02:46, Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:49 PM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: >> Add support for building U-Boot as an EFI application with a .efi suffix. >> This can be loaded by EFI provided that EFI has the same bit width (32- >> or 64-bit) as U-Boot. This unfortunate limitation is imposed by EFI. >> >> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >> --- >> >> Makefile | 5 +++++ >> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile >> index e0218b3..91ebc2e 100644 >> --- a/Makefile >> +++ b/Makefile >> @@ -752,6 +752,7 @@ ifneq ($(CONFIG_SPL_TARGET),) >> ALL-$(CONFIG_SPL) += $(CONFIG_SPL_TARGET:"%"=%) >> endif >> ALL-$(CONFIG_REMAKE_ELF) += u-boot.elf >> +ALL-$(CONFIG_ARCH_EFI) += u-boot.efi > > Can we use u-boot-app.efi? > >> >> ifneq ($(BUILD_ROM),) >> ALL-$(CONFIG_X86_RESET_VECTOR) += u-boot.rom >> @@ -1080,6 +1081,10 @@ u-boot-dtb-tegra.bin: u-boot-nodtb-tegra.bin >> dts/dt.dtb FORCE >> endif >> endif >> >> +OBJCOPYFLAGS_u-boot.efi := $(OBJCOPYFLAGS_EFI) > > Where is OBJCOPYFLAGS_EFI introduced? Can we move that into this patch?
It's in the x86 patch - I don't want to mix generic code with arch-specific code, so have kept it separate. > >> +u-boot.efi: u-boot FORCE >> + $(call if_changed,zobjcopy) >> + >> u-boot-img.bin: spl/u-boot-spl.bin u-boot.img FORCE >> $(call if_changed,cat) >> >> -- > > Regards, > Bin Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot