public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
To: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@gmx.de>
Cc: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
	u-boot@lists.denx.de, agraf@csgraf.de, sjg@chromium.org
Subject: Re: [resent RFC 00/22] efi_loader: more tightly integrate UEFI disks to device model
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2021 21:07:35 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YVtC5/SLwY6/kZL1@enceladus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88cc8ea2-648e-c86b-37e3-bcdb73c3f482@gmx.de>

On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 04:47:53PM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> 
> 
> > 

[...]

> > My approach in this RFC:
> > ========================
> > Due to functional differences in semantics, it would be difficult
> > to identify "udevice" structure as a handle in UEFI world. Instead, we will
> > have to somehow maintain a relationship between a udevice and a handle.
> > 
> > 1-1. add a dedicated uclass, UCLASS_PARTITION, for partitions
> >     Currently, the uclass for paritions is not a UCLASS_BLK.
> >     It can be possible to define partitions as UCLASS_BLK
> >     (with IF_TYPE_PARTION?), but
> >     I'm afraid that it may introduce some chaos since udevice(UCLASS_BLK)
> >     is tightly coupled with 'struct blk_desc' data which is still used
> >     as a "structure to a whole disk" in a lot of interfaces.
> >     (I hope that you understand what it means.)

I think it makes more sense the way it's currently defined.  I don;t see a
point in hiding partitions within UCLASS_BLK

> > 
> >     In DM tree, a UCLASS_PARTITON instance has a UCLASS_BLK parent:
> >     For instance,
> >         UCLASS_SCSI  --- UCLASS_BLK       --- UCLASS_PARTITION
> > 			 (IF_TYPE_SCSI)        |
> >                            +- struct blk_desc   +- struct disk_part
> > 			  +- scsi_blk_ops      +- blk_part_ops
> > 
> > 1-2. create partition udevices in the context of device_probe()
> >     part_init() is already called in blk_post_probe(). See the commit
> >     d0851c893706 ("blk: Call part_init() in the post_probe() method").
> >     Why not enumelate partitions as well in there.
> > 
> > 2. add new block access interfaces, which takes "udevice" as a target device,
> >     in U-Boot and use those functions to implement efi_disk operations
> >     (i.e. EFI_BLOCK_IO_PROTOCOL).
> > 
> > 3-1. maintain a bi-directional link by adding
> >     - a UEFI handle pointer in "struct udevice"
> >     - a udevice pointer in UEFI handle (in fact, in "struct efi_disk_obj")
> 
> An EFI application can create handles with any combination of protocols,
> e.g. a handle with both the block IO protocol and the simple network
> protocol. This means that a udevice cannot be assigned to a handle
> created by an EFI application.
> 
> When the EFI application calls ConnectController() for the handle,
> U-Boot can create child controllers. If U-Boot creates a udevice for
> such a child controller, it has to store the udevice pointer.
> lib/efi_driver/efi_block_device.c uses a private data section but you it
> could be preferable to use a field in struct efi_obj.
> 

I agree with Heinrich here.  Basically U-Boot has to be in charge of that.
Once ConnectController has been called U-Boot should create an 1:1 mapping
between udevice <-> handle and shouldn't be allowed to change that.

> > 
> > 3-2. use device model's post_probe/pre_remove hook to synchronize the lifetime
> >     of efi_disk objects in UEFI world with the device model.
> > 
> > 4. I have no answer to issue(4) and (5) yet.
> 
> 4) A udevice shall only exist for the child controller handle created by
> U-Boot and not for the controller handle created by an EFI application.
> 
> 5) The stop() method of the driver binding protocol has to take care of
> destroying the child controllers and the associated udevices.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Heinrich

Thanks
/Ilias

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-04 18:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-04  3:44 [resent RFC 00/22] efi_loader: more tightly integrate UEFI disks to device model AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 01/22] part: call part_init() in blk_get_device_by_str() only for MMC AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 02/22] scsi: call device_probe() after scanning AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 03/22] usb: storage: " AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 04/22] mmc: " AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 05/22] nvme: " AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 06/22] sata: " AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04 18:45   ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-10-05  1:06     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-08  5:44       ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 07/22] block: ide: " AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 08/22] dm: blk: add UCLASS_PARTITION AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04 18:40   ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-10-05  1:30     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 09/22] dm: blk: add a device-probe hook for scanning disk partitions AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 10/22] dm: blk: add read/write interfaces with udevice AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 11/22] efi_loader: disk: use udevice instead of blk_desc AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 12/22] dm: add a hidden link to efi object AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 13/22] efi_loader: remove !CONFIG_BLK code from efi_disk AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 14/22] efi_loader: disk: a helper function to create efi_disk objects from udevice AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04 18:50   ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-10-05  1:37     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 15/22] dm: blk: call efi's device-probe hook AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 16/22] efi_loader: cleanup after efi_disk-dm integration AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 17/22] efi_loader: add efi_remove_handle() AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-12  8:16   ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-10-13  0:55     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 18/22] efi_loader: efi_disk: a helper function to delete efi_disk objects AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 19/22] dm: blk: call efi's device-removal hook AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 20/22] efi_driver: align with efi_disk-dm integration AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 21/22] efi_driver: cleanup after " AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04  3:44 ` [resent RFC 22/22] efi_selftest: block device: adjust dp for a test disk AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04 14:47 ` [resent RFC 00/22] efi_loader: more tightly integrate UEFI disks to device model Heinrich Schuchardt
2021-10-04 18:07   ` Ilias Apalodimas [this message]
2021-10-05  2:27     ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-05  2:14   ` AKASHI Takahiro
2021-10-04 23:45 ` Simon Glass

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=YVtC5/SLwY6/kZL1@enceladus \
    --to=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
    --cc=agraf@csgraf.de \
    --cc=sjg@chromium.org \
    --cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    --cc=xypron.glpk@gmx.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