From: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, Eugene Cohen <eugene@hp.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@google.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: efi/gop: do we need to check ConOut any more?
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 17:23:06 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191212222305.GA10385@rani.riverdale.lan> (raw)
Since commit 38cb5ef4473c ("X86: Improve GOP detection in the EFI boot
stub") we check for a GOP device that implements ConOut protocol to find
our primary output device. The commit log says that this was done to
avoid problems with the ConSplitter device, which exports a virtual GOP
interface. The original version by Matt Fleming checked for PCIIO
protocol, with a note that says there are some Apple machines have GOPs
without hardware, I assume that that was the same case, GOPs from
ConSplitter.
However, since commit 540f4c0e894f ("efi/libstub: Skip GOP with
PIXEL_BLT_ONLY format") we skip GOP's that don't have a framebuffer.
Looking at the EDK2 implementation of ConSplitter, the virtual GOP will
advertise a framebuffer iff it is attached to exactly one GOP device, in
which case it passes through all the information. If it is attached to a
UGA device or to more than one GOP, it will show as a non-framebuffer
GOP, so we will skip it anyway in those cases.
Given that, is it still necessary to check for conout at all, or would
it be enough to rely on the framebuffer check?
PS I hope I got the latest email addresses correct for everyone
next reply other threads:[~2019-12-12 22:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-12 22:23 Arvind Sankar [this message]
2019-12-13 10:06 ` efi/gop: do we need to check ConOut any more? Ard Biesheuvel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191212222305.GA10385@rani.riverdale.lan \
--to=nivedita@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=eugene@hp.com \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mjg59@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox