From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from phobos.denx.de (phobos.denx.de [85.214.62.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B46C3C433EF for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 15:07:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1F6837EF; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 16:06:49 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="i5c1i7xB"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id 80CBF8349B; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 16:06:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com (mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82E3C8349B for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 16:06:12 +0100 (CET) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sjg@google.com Received: by mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com with SMTP id k23-20020a4abd97000000b002ebc94445a0so749773oop.1 for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 07:06:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qa4X1LJBYrl5CswBvXsx/7bPHKwAtQ4tTtcN54l+wqE=; b=i5c1i7xBCwmtiHErgCb/xoGWz06/LNEv/m5Yhq3lgQEp8CCgQBoWLUONvgwqqgJeTM mFwSpF9FbiDvvN2ykO+XnBOKUZmlEO3wUvrgLHjuwdanu1lRVhtiiZ1Ud71q+OBzh0rK AEiOqnHPU2nFbtu6x2bzguC9K7MNw6L591XWs= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qa4X1LJBYrl5CswBvXsx/7bPHKwAtQ4tTtcN54l+wqE=; b=d+msQ2jc72drFJL7e2kBYbejLzNOmiO+BSd/yQ24qryHdTiGw8xR4No/KEKQC0aLNO zZMoFXDOIUkgSpSsU2CPGFUliDjRI9MrVGTW0QArZmKzOPINik+h1i9QRntWJM8NKwO/ 7Us/o17iFSqIvET0bJlszRa/AzrP088JQUKCB0WHSgHdN7HnbGsPgbY6dc6jjFtC/rhV y9kPjJXVVsr6LYVhl5fLaxqdWYWV7Ihovg/1B3FMhbtH9QyjxCUqRrTmknJlapuFBBue i8021hlzqm7L3XSWZJl0W8p9jLEIyNnnz8O8OQQUwWjuOMaR5IzPjQTJOpvA8Rqto1+n rVTw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Q14b3CSbqBmcrJ7gDIk0D1Pb4hCnupCxAfDvwsbve8J03lI62 hXYfIsjnlIvLI48hZHMjr0HJgkJ9Puni2CW/AfcAeA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwdzzQ9/BnDKKNGdoTRQgHcSmI+1mEN2JXo+9BJB2vCygXYNlrhuhrsh6E+bpGGZqqJnVyFLiSXz93jYLALe3E= X-Received: by 2002:a4a:c606:: with SMTP id l6mr2119886ooq.27.1643295970933; Thu, 27 Jan 2022 07:06:10 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211210064947.73361-1-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <20211210064947.73361-1-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org> From: Simon Glass Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 08:05:56 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC v2 00/20] efi_loader: more tightly integrate UEFI disks to driver model To: AKASHI Takahiro Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt , Alex Graf , Ilias Apalodimas , Masami Hiramatsu , U-Boot Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Sender: "U-Boot" X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.103.5 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Hi Takahiro, On Thu, 9 Dec 2021 at 23:58, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > # This is a kind of snapshot of my current work. > # I submit this to show my progress on this effort, and then > # I haven't addressed all the issues in this version. > # See the change history below. > > The purpose of this RPC is to reignite the discussion about how UEFI > subystem would best be integrated into U-Boot driver model. > In the past, I poposed a couple of patch series, the latest one[1], > while Heinrich revealed his idea[2], and the approach taken here is > something between them, with a focus on block device handlings. Any update on this series please? Regards, Simon