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 mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7455C433F5 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 14:48:10 +0000 (UTC) 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 mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C38560F38 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 14:48:10 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 1C38560F38 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.denx.de Received: from h2850616.stratoserver.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by phobos.denx.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5C378029E; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 16:48:07 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=u-boot-bounces@lists.denx.de Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="R2Qs8Xvg"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id C0506801B2; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 16:48:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com (mail-wr1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) (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 DD20A80615 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 16:48:01 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: phobos.denx.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id k7so4551934wrd.13 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:48:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=dCmEPS9W5QlXx9qM7RYiyHSWHZqRDuT/tAs1bWoRz6I=; b=R2Qs8XvgzwEjF5in37p6ziXCTG9UIqH3N7E0Heb+KUvyyrI9YjsCbWgQiqfzuGUDM1 zvoPIqvy1bqUc0SbY8bcWxzGiyEbTNLaYvWCghMx2N5Cnn7LbYVPRCL3zNa2TzPz18/X 9BjjFK/g4AOpiX+rbBa5sLGJS6OdHM6BFhaSh+xPBeyYIdAnOfHZE7wUQFXvS/C4svOU 0GLNQagPvTyz9zNjBvnbpUSa0NolJowOBINGIkSHjWsoxRCzR7TUw841WFLABjwdYL98 uIBU2kYSbumMadL8QvbWnC5GDTMrAT7p07OcMQsvNvmUFS00zfHNgtdBLAZaZXw6aFvL EW8A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=dCmEPS9W5QlXx9qM7RYiyHSWHZqRDuT/tAs1bWoRz6I=; b=7vmXxOAXrV+VLbXYyisgK5bIZa1XVIXWo82jiX49TKf4yrxI9JIyQC71QusjUONFu0 x8aOldE7YK5fepc0R01H8VFxBLA2LK58CFmdzwsiNyY9ZChZnmNF/5O+qje4Nw5oJd+q PLL5JZ4dW2MBxgytjljOSirqu3MTNEKkFfzzn9O+klyUBx8fGikUYoh7hLM5TG1wl7Xw hwc5rWVOabWnPYmmxPMxtxokumYpuiImGcmglLSD827KIfliL1tWCw1GGm5XN+mRHIha VtwuQGP/T3Vsqz9EGiPivycw5wuGVcWuTXcJdCpqDX8rQYsE+2gC99hA4oHzEh34Nigf SIyQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532uhA0Os1Z42RYKJ9l3o6PNGmp/G+Vv+edObUvnF5f/u3d78RjP 90GRDCxNOSDfMsIaBkysTzVmTKMpbZjdpRoj X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxgGWLiZib50wKAfsTLD5ywL155HI7jkhB9Y+5xFJbCL7YdK68P2ciVyCYD0VLHvYjdAbkR/Q== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6e91:: with SMTP id k17mr40325794wrz.260.1635346081464; Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:48:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from enceladus (ppp-94-66-220-13.home.otenet.gr. [94.66.220.13]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y16sm3513930wmc.2.2021.10.27.07.47.59 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 27 Oct 2021 07:48:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 17:47:58 +0300 From: Ilias Apalodimas To: Simon Glass Cc: U-Boot Mailing List , Michal Simek , Heinrich Schuchardt , Tom Rini , Daniel Schwierzeck , Steffen Jaeckel , Marek =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beh=FAn?= , Lukas Auer , Dennis Gilmore Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 31/41] bootstd: Add an implementation of EFI boot Message-ID: References: <20211023232635.9195-1-sjg@chromium.org> <20211023232635.9195-22-sjg@chromium.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.denx.de X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 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 0.103.2 at phobos.denx.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Hi Simon, On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 08:09:04AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Ilias, > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 at 02:36, Ilias Apalodimas > wrote: > > > > Hi Simon, > > > > On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 at 02:27, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > Add a bootmeth driver which handles EFI boot, using EFI_LOADER. > > > > > > In effect, this provides the same functionality as the 'bootefi' command > > > and shares the same code. But the interface into it is via a bootmeth, > > > so it does not require any special scripts, etc. > > > > > > For now this requires the 'bootefi' command be enabled. Future work may > > > tidy this up so that it can be used without CONFIG_CMDLINE being enabled. > > > > I'll leave this up to Heinrich, but personally I wouldn't include this > > patch at all. EFI has it's bootmgr which can handle booting just fine. > > I don't see why we should duplicate the functionality. The new boot > > method can just have an entry called 'EFI' and then let the existing > > EFI code to decide. > > This is needed so that EFI boot is actually invoked. If bootmgr starts > being used then it can still be invoked from standard boot. The point > is that there is a standard way of booting that supports EFI and other > things. This patch tries to reason about the default naming EFI imposes on it's boot files. distro_efi_read_bootflow() will try to find files following the EFI naming convention (e.g bootaarch64.efi, bootarm.efi etc). If those are found it will try to boot them right? That's not the right thing to do though. On the EFI spec these files are tried if no Boot#### variables are found. So we can get rid of this entirely, add a dummy entry on the bootflow that says 'boot the efi manager' (which is what the next patch does). The efibootmgr then will check Boot#### variables and if none are found, it's going to fallback into loading bootaarch64.efi, bootarm.efi etc essentially offering identical functionality. Regards /Ilias > > This series is about replacing the scripts we currently have with a > proper C implementation that uses driver model. > > > Regards > > /Ilias > > > [..] > > Regards, > Simon