Re: [PATCH] efi/libstub: refactor cmd_stubcopy

[Ard Biesheuvel]

On Tue, 26 Mar 2019 at 07:06, Masahiro Yamada
<yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Ard,
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 11:07 AM Masahiro Yamada
> <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 12:38 AM Ard Biesheuvel
> > <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 15 Feb 2019 at 06:49, Masahiro Yamada
> > > <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 4:26 PM Ard Biesheuvel
> > > > <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 04:45, Masahiro Yamada
> > > > > <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It took me a while to understand what is going on in the nested
> > > > > > if-blocks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Simplify it by removing unneeded code.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   - if_changed automatically adds 'set -e', so any failure in the
> > > > > >     series of commands makes it immediately fail as a whole.
> > > > > >     So, the outer if block is entirely redundant.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   - Since commit 9c2af1c7377a ("kbuild: add .DELETE_ON_ERROR special
> > > > > >     target"), GNU Make automatically deletes the target on any failure
> > > > > >     in its recipe. The explicit 'rm -f $@' is redundant.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >   - surrounding commands with ( ) will spawn a subshell to execute them
> > > > > >     in it, but it is rarely useful to do so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > Assuming that it still works as expected:
> > > > >
> > > > > Acked-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > You can test this by adding a statically initialized global function
> > > > > pointer to any of the libstub source files that get built for ARM.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I tried that, and it failed as expected.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Great, thanks for double checking.
> > >
> > > Are you taking this directly, or do you want me to take it via the EFI
> > > tree? Either is fine with me
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Could you apply it to your EFI tree?
> > Thanks.
>
>
>
> Will you pick it up?
>

Yes, it's on my list for v5.2