From: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [PATCH 5/6] efidebug: add multiple device path instances on Boot####
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 14:58:49 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210312055849.GF15112@laputa> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YEr+M0SfK3oQCo46@apalos.home>
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 07:37:55AM +0200, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> Akashi-san,
> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 02:23:13PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 06:55:57AM +0200, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> > > Akashi-san
> > >
> > > > >
> > > [...]
> > > > > +/**
> > > > > + * add_initrd_instance() - Append a device path to load_options pointing to an
> > > > > + * inirtd
> > > > > + if (!initrd_dp) {
> > > > > + printf("Cannot append media vendor device path path\n");
> > > > > + goto out;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > + final_fp = efi_dp_concat(fp, initrd_dp);
> > > > > + *fp_size = efi_dp_size(fp) + efi_dp_size(initrd_dp) +
> > > > > + (2 * sizeof(struct efi_device_path));
> > > > > +
> > > > > +out:
> > > > > + efi_free_pool(initrd_dp);
> > > > > + efi_free_pool(tmp_dp);
> > > > > + efi_free_pool(tmp_fp);
> > > > > + return final_fp ? final_fp : ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +
> > > > > /**
> > > > > * do_efi_boot_add() - set UEFI load option
> > > > > *
> > > > > @@ -806,7 +868,9 @@ static int do_efi_show_tables(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag,
> > > > > *
> > > > > * Implement efidebug "boot add" sub-command. Create or change UEFI load option.
> > > > > *
> > > > > - * efidebug boot add <id> <label> <interface> <devnum>[:<part>] <file> <options>
> > > > > + * efidebug boot add -b <id> <label> <interface> <devnum>[:<part>] <file>
> > > > > + * -i <file> <interface2> <devnum2>[:<part>] <initrd>
> > > > > + * -s '<options>'
> > > >
> > > > We discussed another syntax:
> > > > efidebug boot add <id> ...
> > > > efidebug boot add-initrd <id> <initrd path>
> > > > (Please don't care detailed syntax for now.)
> > >
> > > Yep and I completely agree this is a better format but ...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > What is the difficulty that you have had to implement this type of
> > > > interface?
> > >
> > > The problem is that the initrd and kernel eventually go into *one* Boot####
> > > variable. So it's much easier to treat them in a single command as a bundle.
> > >
> > > Otherwise you'll have to start adding checks on the initrd code to make
> > > sure the Boot### variable exists before you append an initrd.
> > > Then you have to deserialize the existing stored device path in Boot####,
> > > append the initrd and serialize it again (and last time I checked this is not
> > > as easy as it sounds).
> >
> > If we take the format like:
> > kernel path,end(0xff),
> > VenMedia(INITRD),initrd1 path,end(0xff),
> > VenMedia(INITRD),initrd2 path,end(0xff),
> >
> > all that we have to do is
> > - deserialize the boot option variable,
> > - append initrd device path to a list (after kernel device path),
> > - serialize all the option together,
>
> Sure but the serialize/deserialize is not as easy as it sounds and requires
> code as well for the optional data etc.
I don't still understand why it's not so easy.
Because I'm the author of that function?
> Again I am not saying it's not doable, or even more elegant. I am saying the
> extra code doesn't seemt to worth the effort right now. Especially since we
> support a *single* initrd on the loading anyway and no dtbs.
Better user interface would pay the efforts of implementation.
> >
> > Appending is quite simple, isn't it?
> > (because we will not have to parse a device path list.)
> >
>
> Yes and i've mentioned most of this on the mailing list.
> We did choose the other format though...
Simply, who objected it?
I remember that Heinrich has a similar idea.
So who else?
> > > Also what happens if you edit a Boot#### option and that option has an initrd?
> > If I were you,
> >
> > > You have to pick up the existing initrd and move it over? Or do we silently
> > > delete it?
> > > Something like:
> > > efidebug boot add 0001
> > > efidebug boot add-initrd 0001
> > > efidebug boot add 0001
> >
> > even with the current implementation,
> > > efidebug boot add 0001
> > > efidebug boot add 0001
> > those sequence will overwrite the existing variable and,
> > deeleting initrd by the second "efidebug boot add" would make sense.
>
> Yea but that feels 'natural' because it's a single command. Which is also the
> case with the current code. In multiple commands you wouldn't expect the
> initrd to away, unless you knew it was stored in a Boot option.
Well, if it's your concern, we can print a warning, say
You're trying to rewrite BootXXXX variable (you will lost the existing data).
Are you sure [y/n]?
But I don't think it's even worth doing so
because you can simply type "Ctrl-p" twice at the command line
if you want to run "efidebug boot add-initrd ..." again :)
-Takahiro Akashi
>
> Thanks
> /Ilias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-12 5:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-05 22:22 [PATCH 1/6] efi_selftest: Remove loadfile2 for initrd selftests Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-05 22:22 ` [PATCH 2/6] efi_loader: Add device path related functions for initrd via Boot#### Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 7:50 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-11 9:10 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 11:00 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-11 11:36 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 11:44 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-11 12:31 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-11 12:39 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 12:44 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-11 12:49 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 13:31 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 20:25 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-12 2:50 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-03-12 4:10 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-12 4:32 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-03-12 4:42 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-12 5:02 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-03-12 5:19 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-05 22:22 ` [PATCH 3/6] efi_loader: Introduce helper functions for EFI Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 9:15 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-05 22:23 ` [PATCH 4/6] efi_loader: Replace config option for initrd loading Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 12:23 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-11 12:30 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 12:50 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-05 22:23 ` [PATCH 5/6] efidebug: add multiple device path instances on Boot#### Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 12:38 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-11 12:42 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-12 4:44 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-03-12 4:55 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-12 5:23 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-03-12 5:37 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-12 5:58 ` AKASHI Takahiro [this message]
2021-03-12 7:19 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-12 16:25 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-05 22:23 ` [PATCH 6/6] doc: Update uefi documentation for initrd loading options Ilias Apalodimas
2021-03-11 12:39 ` Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-03-11 7:26 ` [PATCH 1/6] efi_selftest: Remove loadfile2 for initrd selftests 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=20210312055849.GF15112@laputa \
--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