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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C34FC433F5 for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 19:58:02 +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 73539610CE for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 19:58:01 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 73539610CE Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=chromium.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 C9CA583514; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 21:57:59 +0200 (CEST) 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="Iy6gpYHc"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by phobos.denx.de (Postfix, from userid 109) id C019783518; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 21:57:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-wm1-x332.google.com (mail-wm1-x332.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::332]) (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 0C5738350E for ; Thu, 9 Sep 2021 21:57:53 +0200 (CEST) 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-wm1-x332.google.com with SMTP id 192-20020a1c04c9000000b002f7a4ab0a49so1786410wme.0 for ; Thu, 09 Sep 2021 12:57:53 -0700 (PDT) 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=e9RnFxK0ElscnF8QLC19NV3c/B8a6iuSfMnskvq7H5I=; b=Iy6gpYHclvwJeOJ/R72698qCaF7q3kpsU1fkYRTk2H1lMuABENma2LP4DiGHyvsZA/ vC6mRV/JZW8iQ5/npLAgzm58txGdecr5KKl21NMoqUqKRzHEND0SR9Feg+mjZQDc0ECP mIFtZeO6fMOd/qF72Gx/vwbfH+pLFO4e8YuWU= 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=e9RnFxK0ElscnF8QLC19NV3c/B8a6iuSfMnskvq7H5I=; b=XjTejuo9sAKNxreod0qXMcagUkHjEILfg7ar94Olply6Gn2yWJL9H0fJ3dsrsb48Q4 NvA7fcOtRr4DJP2dvmX3BqQLpA1E1TzP85/uuqiADzd2lE3QqUhZL5+nBxLOuF6WjSrJ +TZpt3RS6IwnrishctC+ErUtmtwg6fyKnQ2PhWWevbE7gW+hU4T7JfclprWAZ0b0oAGF 1HyYVOBYS1ImEg0GTL5QiTMt9aqEOvxX4HDad3nLfNGFvzJauds9AdJmFBAqcUC26vnT v92nYrmbX9pPjDUsfk72dYAiLSw3ydp+dy5u0P65qVFwyioL9Uiuezh+nZS+gFNU3mEQ ToXg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531/nom8SozEFBBEC1bEy8ZBhU4k2SkWHomDdWNz0emRDZbm2JlA WhhCKAfOccPDpqfjxyylS8X/z2IV25d1p8YwIsTTDA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy+L67OlxUNMMvmnLDXFpvVSeQnkCiqY2cTwH21Pjwf0eNIqRDqJ+kCyYdSDDSOKBFe3psm2KDYkrXnPTRz5RM= X-Received: by 2002:a1c:acc2:: with SMTP id v185mr4790433wme.71.1631217472161; Thu, 09 Sep 2021 12:57:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210908133405.696481-1-sjg@chromium.org> <20210908073355.11.Id572ddf5eb457096b95d30ae2d8675f539367fe8@changeid> In-Reply-To: From: Simon Glass Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 13:57:39 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/35] RFC: efi: Drop code that doesn't work with driver model To: Heinrich Schuchardt Cc: U-Boot Mailing List , Ilias Apalodimas , Bin Meng , Tom Rini , Christian Melki , Alexander Graf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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 Heinrich, On Thu, 9 Sept 2021 at 03:26, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > > > On 9/9/21 10:57 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Heinrich, > > > > On Wed, 8 Sept 2021 at 11:44, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 9/8/21 3:33 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > >>> This code should never have been added as it builds a new feature on top > >>> of legacy code. Drop it and add a dependency on BLK for this feature. > >>> > >>> Boards which want EFI_LOADER should migrate to driver model first. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass > >> > >> This patch is not related to the rest of the series and the code has a > >> different maintainer. > >> > >> So, please, separate it from the series. > > > > Who is the maintainer? > > Until 623b3a57976 ("efi_selftest: provide an EFI selftest application") > there was no official maintainer for lib/efi/ but you were the main > contributor. > > But with that patch directory lib/efi/ was assigned to EFI PAYLOAD. > > I am happy if you would continue to care about U-Boot on EFI. OK. > > > > > I need this patch for this series to work. You can still review things > > for other maintainers and in this case it is common for one maintainer > > to pick up the series once the others are happy. > > The direction of this patch is completely correct. > > There are some things that will have to be changed, e.g we should not > require CONFIG_DM_ETH=y. I will work on reviewing this patch in detail. OK, but why not require DM_ETH? The deadline passed a year ago. > > I already added CONFIG_BLK as a requirement for CONFIG_EFI_LOADER in a > submitted patch. OK good. > > Removing legacy code from lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c and > lib/efi_loader/efi_device_path.c could be done before all U-Boot on EFI > patches. > > Therefore I still think it makes sense to split the series in two: > > 1) Cleanup of the UEFI implementation > 2) Rework of U-Boot on EFI > > I hope merging in this sequence of patch series makes send to you. I am fine if you want to take on the clean-up stuff for BLK, etc. In that case we can just drop this patch when applying. But I do need some sort of patch here, for things to work. Regards, Simon