On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 08:19:42PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> On 12.08.16 19:20, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > On 10 August 2016 at 13:01, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 10 Aug 2016, at 18:25, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 03:25:16PM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Am 10.08.2016 um 15:16 schrieb Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Hi Alex,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 10 August 2016 at 07:02, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 08/10/2016 02:56 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> +Tom
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Alex,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 10 August 2016 at 01:47, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 08 Aug 2016, at 23:44, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Alexander,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 5 August 2016 at 06:49, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> When using CONFIG_BLK, there were 2 issues:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 1) The name we generate the device with has to match the
> >>>>>>>>>> name we set in efi_set_bootdev()
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> 2) The device we pass into our block functions was wrong,
> >>>>>>>>>> we should not rediscover it but just use the already known
> >>>>>>>>>> pointer.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> This patch fixes both issues.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de>
> >>>>>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>>>> cmd/bootefi.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
> >>>>>>>>>> lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c | 18 +++++++++++-------
> >>>>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>> [...]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c b/lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c
> >>>>>>>>>> index c434c92..e00a747 100644
> >>>>>>>>>> --- a/lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c
> >>>>>>>>>> +++ b/lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c
> >>>>>>>>>> @@ -31,6 +31,8 @@ struct efi_disk_obj {
> >>>>>>>>>> struct efi_device_path_file_path *dp;
> >>>>>>>>>> /* Offset into disk for simple partitions */
> >>>>>>>>>> lbaint_t offset;
> >>>>>>>>>> + /* Internal block device */
> >>>>>>>>>> + const struct blk_desc *desc;
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Rather than storing this, can you store the udevice?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I could, but then I would diverge between the CONFIG_BLK and
> >>>>>>>> non-CONFIG_BLK path again, which would turn the code into an #ifdef
> >>>>>>>> mess
> >>>>>>>> (read: hard to maintain), because the whole device creation path
> >>>>>>>> relies on
> >>>>>>>> struct blk_desc * today and doesn’t pass the udevice anywhere.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Do you feel strongly about this? To give you an idea how messy it
> >>>>>>>> gets,
> >>>>>>>> the diff is below.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Actually I'd like to make this feature depend on CONFIG_BLK. If we add
> >>>>>>> new features that don't use driver model, and then use the legacy data
> >>>>>>> structures such that converting to driver model becomes harder, we'll
> >>>>>>> never be done.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I did mention this at the beginning and it seems to have come to pass.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In order of preference from my side:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1. Make EFI_LOADER depend on BLK
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If we make EFI_LOADER depend on BLK, doesn't that break all systems
> >>>>>> that
> >>>>>> need storage that isn't converted to device model today? Like the SATA
> >>>>>> breakage on Xilinx systems, just at a much bigger scale?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No it just means that these platforms need to move to BLK before they
> >>>>> can use the EFI loader. Given the embryonic nature of this feature,
> >>>>> that seems reasonable, and the impact would be small. It will also
> >>>>> encourage conversion and keep the code cleaner.
> >>>>
> >>>> No, it will simply make my life harder because I would have to sit
> >>>> down and vonvert every single board to BLK that I need EFI enabled.
> >>>
> >>> Seems like as good a place as any to jump in, of the boards that you
> >>> need EFI enabled on, what isn't converted today?
> >>
> >> I want to make EFI the default boot path in openSUSE, which means any
> >> board that anyone out there wants to run openSUSE on would be on the list.
> >> Anything that keeps them from running EFI on a random board is a road
> >> block that I’d rather not have if I can avoid it.
> >
> > Of course, I fully understand that. However as mentioned in this
> > patch, you are creating future problems.
>
> I don't see how I am creating future problems, really. Passing a
> udevice* instead of the struct blk_desc* internally doesn't improve the
> code really at the end of the day.
>
> > Can you address Tom's question? I take it that it boots on Raspberry
> > Pi (which I'd like to try actually - are there instructions
> > somewhere?). We can easily convert that over. Anything else?
>
> For a list of currently available "upstream" openSUSE images, see
> https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/openSUSE:Factory:ARM/JeOS/pre_checkin.sh?expand=1
>
> Every one of those is on the short-term list. Any other board that
> people want to run on is potentially on the mid-term to long-term list.OK, that is a lot of boards and such. And yes, I see both of these features / projects as important to the long-term health of U-Boot. So, Alex, when we've got storage converted fully to DM, you're willing to do further clean-ups to make it DM-better, yes? Thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
