Re: [PATCH 1/1] configs: add mkeficapsule to tools-only_defconfig

[AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>]

Simon, Heinrich,

On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 09:02:23AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 09:47:21PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 08:15:43AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 09:10:23PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > > Tom,
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 07:46:15AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 05:30:36PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 09:27:50AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> > > > > > > On 9/9/21 8:09 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 07:27:10AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> > > > > > > > > mkeficapsule is used to create capsules for UEFI firmware update.
> > > > > > > > > To ease inclusion into U-Boot tools packages of Linux distributions we
> > > > > > > > > should add it to the tools-only_defconfig.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Provide dummy values for CONFIG_AVB_BUF_ADDR, CONFIG_AVB_BUF_SIZE to
> > > > > > > > > satisfy Kconfig.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Suggested-by: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant@debian.org>
> > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>
> > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > >   configs/tools-only_defconfig | 7 ++++++-
> > > > > > > > >   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > diff --git a/configs/tools-only_defconfig b/configs/tools-only_defconfig
> > > > > > > > > index f54bc1802c..8a20d3fb05 100644
> > > > > > > > > --- a/configs/tools-only_defconfig
> > > > > > > > > +++ b/configs/tools-only_defconfig
> > > > > > > > > @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ CONFIG_ANDROID_BOOT_IMAGE=y
> > > > > > > > >   CONFIG_FIT=y
> > > > > > > > >   CONFIG_FIT_SIGNATURE=y
> > > > > > > > >   CONFIG_MISC_INIT_F=y
> > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_AVB_BUF_ADDR=0x0
> > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_AVB_BUF_SIZE=0x8192
> > > > > > > > >   # CONFIG_CMD_BOOTD is not set
> > > > > > > > >   # CONFIG_CMD_BOOTM is not set
> > > > > > > > >   # CONFIG_CMD_ELF is not set
> > > > > > > > > @@ -29,4 +31,7 @@ CONFIG_SYSRESET=y
> > > > > > > > >   # CONFIG_VIRTIO_MMIO is not set
> > > > > > > > >   # CONFIG_VIRTIO_PCI is not set
> > > > > > > > >   # CONFIG_VIRTIO_SANDBOX is not set
> > > > > > > > > -# CONFIG_EFI_LOADER is not set
> > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_ON_DISK=y
> > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_FIRMWARE_FIT=y
> > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_FIRMWARE_RAW=y
> > > > > > > > > +CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_AUTHENTICATE=y
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I think that we should use the way that I suggested in my patch[1].
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > -Takahiro Akashi
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > [1] https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2021-August/459349.html
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Your patch [1] still requires some rework:
> > > > > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20210831024659.53464-2-takahiro.akashi@linaro.org/
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > [1] changes what mkeficapsule looks like and this patch makes it
> > > > > > > available in tools-only_defconfig?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Aren't these two patches complementary?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > With my patch applied, the only option we need to compile mkeficapsule is:
> > > > > >    CONFIG_TOOLS_MKEFICAPSULE
> > > > > >    (and optionally CONFIG_TOOLS_LIBCRYPTO)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > There is no target-config dependency as you have expected.
> > > > > 
> > > > > There's two issues.  First, the general one is that when just building
> > > > > host tools (typically to package up in a distribution of some sort), it
> > > > > shouldn't depend on how "U-Boot" was configured (set aside the default
> > > > > environment problem).
> > > > 
> > > > I don't get your point. CONFIG_TOOLS_MKEFICAPSULE is only for building
> > > > mkeficapsule. It has nothing to do with U-Boot itself.
> > > 
> > > My point is that "make tools-only" must build all the tools that would
> > > be packaged up in a distribution or otherwise sent to end users.  It
> > > must not depend on (with the exceptions above) how we configured the
> > > build.
> > 
> > I can see bunch of "hostprogs-$(CONFIG_...) += ...", and
> > some of them are not always built.
> > So what do you mean by "all the tools"?
> 
> Our emails crossed.  Yes, I was slightly wrong above, and the comment at
> the top of tools/Makefile:
> # A couple of simple rules:
> #
> # 1) Do not use target CONFIG_* options to enable or disable features in
> # host
> #    tools. Only use the configs from tools/Kconfig
> # 2) It's okay to use target configs to disable building specific tools.
> #    That's as long as the features of those tools aren't modified.
> 
> are correct.  So it's OK that the tool today depends on
> CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT.
> 
> > Which tools be packed in is totally up to a distro, isn't it?
> 
> That's the difference between building and packaging.  The best general
> answer is to build everything and package individually, when fine
> grained control is desired.  But no, making more work on each
> distribution to get all tools built makes things harder, not easier, is
> the feedback we've gotten (and with my OE guy hat on, agree with).

@Simon,
Even so, I would like you to clarify what "all (the tools)" and
"tools-only" means.
Looking at tools/Makefile, "hostprogs-y" can be affected by several
different types of kconfigs:

1) the tools is necessary to build the u-boot binary for a specific
   target or board.
2) the tool is not needed for building, but is used for a specific
   feature of U-Boot (later by users).

tools-only_defconfig addresses (2), plus 
3) all the kconfigs which will allows for building "full-featured" tools
which can be implemented with such kconfigs on or off.

@Heinrich,
Regarding CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT, I prefer having a dedicated
kconfig, CONFIG_TOOLS_MKEFICAPSULE for some reasons:

* Difference btw (2) and (3) is not trivial to users, and
  if CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT is used, even much so.
* On the other hand,
  ===>
  config TOOLS_MKEFICAPSULE
  	bool "Build efimkcapsule command"
  	default y if EFI_CAPSULE_ON_DISK
  <===
  would make this clear.
  (We might better use 'imply' here.)
* CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT is an internal kconfig, while
  CONFIG_TOOL_MAKEFICAPSULE is an external one and you can turn it
  on and off with "make menuconfig".
  (There is a small possibility that people may want to use another
  tool instead, like one from EDK-II's script? Who knows.)

Finally,
> Currently the tool is not build at all if
> CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT is not selected. Do I understand you
> right that this dependency should be lifted?

I'm not sure this statement targeted me or not.
As a matter of fact, the implementation of mkeficapsule even in
the current form doesn't depend on none of
CONFIG_EFI_HAVE_CAPSULE_SUPPORT
CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_ON_DISK
CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_FIRMWARE_FIT
CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_FIRMWARE_RAW
CONFIG_EFI_CAPSULE_AUTHENTICATE

-Takahiro Akashi

> -- 
> Tom