From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 17:00:03 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v5 00/19] efi_loader: non-volatile variables
	support
In-Reply-To: <20191101060434.GV10448@linaro.org>
References: <20190905082133.18996-1-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
 <20191001062829.GA18778@linaro.org> <20191023065332.GE10448@linaro.org>
 <20191025070644.4F34D2400D6@gemini.denx.de>
 <20191025075645.GJ10448@linaro.org>
 <20191025132523.A8CA7240064@gemini.denx.de>
 <20191028011435.GP10448@linaro.org>
 <20191029132819.35759240034@gemini.denx.de>
 <20191101060434.GV10448@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <20191104160003.1B04C24009F@gemini.denx.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Dear Takahiro,

In message <20191101060434.GV10448@linaro.org> you wrote:
>
> > This is even worse, as instead of adding a single argument to a
> > function call you are adding two full fucntion calls.
> > 
> > But why would that be needed?
> > 
> > U-Boot is strictly single tasking.  You always know what the current
> > context is, and nobody will change it behind your back.
> > 
> > And UEFI functions are not being called in random places, they are
> > limited to a small set of UEFI commands, right?  So why do you not
> > just enter UEFI context when you start executing UEFI code, and
> > restore the rpevious state when returning to non-UEFI U-Boot?
>
> Can you elaborate What you mean by "entering UEFI context"?

You wrote:

| So do you always admit the following coding?
| ===8<===
|   (in some UEFI function)
|   ...
|   old_ctx = env_set_context(ctx_uefi);
|   env_set(var, value);
|   env_set_context(old_ctx);
|   ...
| ===>8===

In this code, the function call ``env_set_context(ctx_uefi)'' would
enter the UEFI context, right?  This is what I mean.

> What I'm thinking of here is that we would add one more member field, which
> is a pointer to my "env_context," in GD and change it in env_set_context().
> This can be defined even as an inline function.

Yes, this is OK - I think I understood this already.

What I mean is that such a call of env_set_context() is not needed
for each and every call of other env_*() functions.

If I understand correctly, only the UEFI specific commands will
actually care about UEFI contexts - most likely no code outside
cmd/nvedit_efi.c ?

So you have pretty clear entry and exit points into and from the
UEFI world, and it should be sufficient to set and restore this
context only then.

> I don't see why you deny such a simple solution with lots of flexibility.

I am concerned about code size and execution speed.  So far, you did
not provide any such numbers, even though I repeatedly asked for the
size impact, especially for non-UEFI systems.

Please keep in mind that there are many cases where we need access
to the environment already in SPL, and on all systems where security
plays any role we must have the same set of features enabled for the
environment code in SPL and TPL (if these need access to the
envronment) as in U-Boot proper, and memory is a precious resource
there.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,      Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
You may call me by my name, Wirth, or by my value, Worth.
- Nicklaus Wirth