public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC 1/8] efi_loader: boottime: don't add device path protocol to image handle
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:50:11 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190327025009.GP9937@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7e84b00f-805a-f5b6-e459-d35c69d2d036@gmx.de>

On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 06:29:14AM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> On 3/6/19 6:04 AM, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> > On 3/6/19 1:27 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 05, 2019 at 08:48:37PM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> >>> On 3/5/19 6:53 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >>>> It is just wrong to add devcie path protocol to image handle.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>  lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c | 11 +----------
> >>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c b/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
> >>>> index bd8b8a17ae71..7bd9c0a952d4 100644
> >>>> --- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
> >>>> +++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_boottime.c
> >>>> @@ -1540,17 +1540,8 @@ efi_status_t efi_setup_loaded_image(struct efi_device_path *device_path,
> >>>>  	info->file_path = file_path;
> >>>>  	info->system_table = &systab;
> >>>>  
> >>>> -	if (device_path) {
> >>>> +	if (device_path)
> >>>>  		info->device_handle = efi_dp_find_obj(device_path, NULL);
> >>>> -		/*
> >>>> -		 * When asking for the device path interface, return
> >>>> -		 * bootefi_device_path
> >>>> -		 */
> >>>> -		ret = efi_add_protocol(&obj->header,
> >>>> -				       &efi_guid_device_path, device_path);
> >>>
> >>> Installing the device path is not the problem. It is the GUID that is
> >>> wrong. Use EFI_LOADED_IMAGE_DEVICE_PATH_PROTOCOL_GUID here.
> >>
> >> Okay, but I believe that we need duplicate device_path here
> >> before installing it as EFI_LOADED_IMAGE_DEVICE_PATH_PROTOCOL_GUID.
> >>
> >> See this line:
> >>
> >>>>  		info->device_handle = efi_dp_find_obj(device_path, NULL);
> >>
> >> Normally, device_path is expected to be already associated with
> >> another handle. We should not allow two handles to share one protocol(data).
> >> That is also why I initially believed that add_protocol() should be removed.
> > 
> > The spec says we should use a copy of the unchanged DevicePath parameter
> > of LoadImage() which may be NULL.
> > 
> > So we have to rework all callers to get the device_path parameter of
> > efi_setup_loaded_image() right.
> > 
> 
> Why are we constructing a dummy memory device path at all in cmd/bootefi?
> 
> The commit message of patch bf19273e81eb "efi_loader: Add mem-mapped for
> fallback" that introduced this does not give a valid answer as it is
> explicitly allowable to call LoadImage with DevicePath = NULL if
> SourceBuffer is provided.

As far as I know, if we load EDK2's Shell.efi by calling LoadImage
*without* DevicePath, it will fail to boot at some assertion check.

-Takahiro Akashi

> So I suggest we rid ourselves of the dummy device path with this patch
> series.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Heinrich

  reply	other threads:[~2019-03-27  2:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-05  5:53 [U-Boot] [RFC 0/8] efi_loader: rework bootefi/bootmgr AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-05  5:53 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 1/8] efi_loader: boottime: don't add device path protocol to image handle AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-05 19:48   ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2019-03-06  0:27     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-06  5:04       ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2019-03-06  5:29         ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2019-03-27  2:50           ` AKASHI Takahiro [this message]
2019-03-05  5:53 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 2/8] efi_loader: boottime: export efi_[un]load_image() AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-05 20:02   ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2019-03-05  5:53 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 3/8] efi_loader: bootmgr: return pointer and size of buffer in loading AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-21 11:41   ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2019-03-22  2:08     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-05  5:53 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 4/8] cmd: bootefi: move do_bootefi_bootmgr_exec() forward AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-21 11:48   ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2019-03-22  2:16     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-05  5:53 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 5/8] cmd: bootefi: carve out fdt handling AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-05  5:53 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 6/8] cmd: bootefi: carve out efi_selftest code from do_bootefi() AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-05  5:53 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 7/8] cmd: bootefi: rework do_bootefi(), using load_image API AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-05  5:53 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 8/8] cmd: add efibootmgr command AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-19  7:23 ` [U-Boot] [RFC 0/8] efi_loader: rework bootefi/bootmgr AKASHI Takahiro
2019-03-21  6:41   ` Heinrich Schuchardt

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=20190327025009.GP9937@linaro.org \
    --to=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /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