Hi Alex, On 12 June 2018 at 08:06, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: > > > On 12.06.18 15:48, Simon Glass wrote: >> Hi Alex, >> >> On 12 June 2018 at 02:13, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 12.06.18 07:26, Simon Glass wrote: >>>> With sandbox these values depend on the host system. Let's assume that it >>>> is x86_64 for now. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> Changes in v5: None >>>> Changes in v4: None >>>> Changes in v3: None >>>> Changes in v2: None >>>> >>>> include/config_distro_bootcmd.h | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h >>>> b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h >>>> index d672e8ebe6..8d11f52da0 100644 >>>> --- a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h >>>> +++ b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h >>>> @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ >>>> #elif defined(CONFIG_ARM) >>>> #define BOOTENV_EFI_PXE_ARCH "0xa" >>>> #define BOOTENV_EFI_PXE_VCI "PXEClient:Arch:00010:UNDI:003000" >>>> -#elif defined(CONFIG_X86) >>>> +#elif defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined(CONFIG_SANDBOX) >>> >>> I was serious when I said I wanted to have a defined(__x86_64__) guard. >>> Otherwise we'll expose incorrect information. And I doubt that anyone >>> will catch it when porting sandbox to non-x86, because it doesn't error out. >> >> OK I can do a warning but I cannot use the current guard, otherwise it >> prevents sandbox even building on ARM hosts! > > Just change defined(CONFIG_X86) into defined(__x86_64__) || > defined(__i386__) then? Maybe the same for the other archs?
I mean print a warning if sandbox is not being build on x86. What you are suggesting is some sort of ad-hoc architecture detection in the EFI header file. If we have a problem here, it should be solved centrally. I'll add a comment. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
