[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 4/5] cmd: bootefi: run an EFI application of a specific load option

Heinrich Schuchardt
2019-02-27T19:33:17Z

On 2/27/19 7:47 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 07:31:06AM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>> On 2/27/19 6:58 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 08:30:50PM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>>>> On 1/15/19 3:54 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
>>>>> With this patch applied, we will be able to selectively execute
>>>>> an EFI application by specifying a load option, say "1" for Boot0001,
>>>>> "2" for Boot0002 and so on.
>>>>>
>>>>> => bootefi bootmgr <fdt addr> 1, or
>>>>> bootefi bootmgr - 1
>>>>
>>>> You already introduced the support for BootNext. So is there a real benefit?
>>>
>>> This is a convenient way of running EFI application directly,
>>> but I already removed this feature from the next version.
>>
>> Please, remove 'run -e' instead because it cannot specify the device
>> tree needed for booting ARM boards.
>
> See my comment for patch#5 first.
>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that BootXXXX need not be included in "BootOrder".
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> cmd/bootefi.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>>>>> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/cmd/bootefi.c b/cmd/bootefi.c
>>>>> index 3be01b49b589..241fd0f987ab 100644
>>>>> --- a/cmd/bootefi.c
>>>>> +++ b/cmd/bootefi.c
>>>>> @@ -471,16 +471,15 @@ static efi_status_t bootefi_test_prepare
>>>>>
>>>>> #endif /* CONFIG_CMD_BOOTEFI_SELFTEST */
>>>>>
>>>>> -static int do_bootefi_bootmgr_exec(void)
>>>>> +static int do_bootefi_bootmgr_exec(int boot_id)
>>>>> {
>>>>> struct efi_device_path *device_path, *file_path;
>>>>> void *addr;
>>>>> efi_status_t r;
>>>>>
>>>>> - addr = efi_bootmgr_load(EFI_BOOTMGR_DEFAULT_ORDER,
>>>>> - &device_path, &file_path);
>>>>> + addr = efi_bootmgr_load(boot_id, &device_path, &file_path);
>>>>> if (!addr)
>>>>> - return 1;
>>>>> + return CMD_RET_FAILURE;
>>>>>
>>>>> printf("## Starting EFI application at %p ...\n", addr);
>>>>> r = do_bootefi_exec(addr, device_path, file_path);
>>>>> @@ -488,9 +487,9 @@ static int do_bootefi_bootmgr_exec(void)
>>>>> r & ~EFI_ERROR_MASK);
>>>>>
>>>>> if (r != EFI_SUCCESS)
>>>>> - return 1;
>>>>> + return CMD_RET_FAILURE;
>>>>>
>>>>> - return 0;
>>>>> + return CMD_RET_SUCCESS;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /* Interpreter command to boot an arbitrary EFI image from memory */
>>>>> @@ -546,10 +545,28 @@ static int do_bootefi(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[])
>>>>> } else
>>>>> #endif
>>>>> if (!strcmp(argv[1], "bootmgr")) {
>>>>> - if (efi_handle_fdt(argc > 2 ? argv[2] : NULL))
>>>>> - return CMD_RET_FAILURE;
>>>>> + char *fdtstr, *endp;
>>>>> + int boot_id = EFI_BOOTMGR_DEFAULT_ORDER;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (argc > 2) {
>>>>> + fdtstr = argv[2];
>>>>> + /* Special address "-" means no device tree */
>>>>> + if (fdtstr[0] == '-')
>>>>> + fdtstr = NULL;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + r = efi_handle_fdt(fdtstr);
>>>>> + if (r)
>>>>> + return CMD_RET_FAILURE;
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (argc > 3) {
>>>>> + boot_id = (int)simple_strtoul(argv[3], &endp, 0);
>>>>> + if ((argv[3] + strlen(argv[3]) != endp) ||
>>>>> + boot_id > 0xffff)
>>>>> + return CMD_RET_USAGE;
>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> - return do_bootefi_bootmgr_exec();
>>>>> + return do_bootefi_bootmgr_exec(boot_id);
>>>>
>>>> Why not communicate via the BootNext variable?
>>>
>>> I don't get your point.
>>> BootNext and BootOrder are both defined by UEFI specification.
>>
>> Instead of changing the interface of do_bootefi_bootmgr_exec()
>
> Who care changing an *internal* function?
>
>> you could
>> simply set BootNext. Then the boot manager would pick up the option from
>> the variable and finally delete the variable. This would result in less
>> code.
>
> No. Even with "run -e," BootNext will disappear after execution.
> This is a requirement by UEFI spec.

Shouldn't BootNext always be reset when executing bootefi no matter
whether the boot manager is used or not?

Regards

Heinrich

>
> Thanks,
> -Takahiro Akashi
>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Heinrich
>>
>>>
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> saddr = argv[1];
>>>>>
>>>>> @@ -590,7 +607,7 @@ static char bootefi_help_text[] =
>>>>> " Use environment variable efi_selftest to select a single test.\n"
>>>>> " Use 'setenv efi_selftest list' to enumerate all tests.\n"
>>>>> #endif
>>>>> - "bootefi bootmgr [fdt addr]\n"
>>>>> + "bootefi bootmgr [<fdt addr>|'-' [<boot id>]]\n"
>>>>> " - load and boot EFI payload based on BootOrder/BootXXXX variables.\n"
>>>>> "\n"
>>>>> " If specified, the device tree located at <fdt address> gets\n"
>>>>> @@ -598,7 +615,7 @@ static char bootefi_help_text[] =
>>>>> #endif
>>>>>
>>>>> U_BOOT_CMD(
>>>>> - bootefi, 3, 0, do_bootefi,
>>>>> + bootefi, 5, 0, do_bootefi,
>>>>
>>>> Why 5?
>>>
>>> For additional/optional '-' and <boot id>.
>>> But I removed this feature from bootefi.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Takahiro Akashi
>>>
>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>>
>>>> Heinrich
>>>>
>>>>> "Boots an EFI payload from memory",
>>>>> bootefi_help_text
>>>>> );
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>