On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 01:02:18PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 07:52, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 07:44:37PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 at 17:55, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 01:45:49AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 7/27/21 12:07 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 12:36:18PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > This feature should never have been made available when driver > > > > > > > model > > > > > > > or devicetree are disabled. Add these as conditions, so that we > > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > create even more barriers to migration. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Add a note about the substantial size increment associated with > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > option. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > > > > > - Split out new patch to make EFI_LOADER depend on DM and > > > > > > > OF_CONTROL > > > > > > > - Note the approximate size of this feature in the help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > lib/efi_loader/Kconfig | 4 +++- > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig > > > > > > > index 6242caceb7f..466abfed300 100644 > > > > > > > --- a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig > > > > > > > +++ b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig > > > > > > > @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ > > > > > > > config EFI_LOADER > > > > > > > bool "Support running UEFI applications" > > > > > > > - depends on OF_LIBFDT && ( \ > > > > > > > + depends on OF_LIBFDT && DM && OF_CONTROL && ( \ > > > > > > > > > > Didn't Tom eliminate all boards without CONFIG_DM? Shouldn't we get > > > > > rid > > > > > of this symbol? > > > > > > > > No, but I did send out a message about that today as we're very close. > > > > Much closer than I had expected us to be. > > > > > > Note we will still have SPL_DM, I think. > > > > Right. > > > > > > > Are there boards using DM and not OF_CONTROL or OF_CONTROL and not DM? > > > > > > > > Yes, a few. It's vexpress_aemv8a_semi, warp (fixed by > > > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20210402180552.1075997-2-pbrobin...@gmail.com/ > > > > so false positive), cm_t335, devkit8000, armadillo-800eva, kzm9g and > > > > sniper. > > > > > > > > > Why are these separate symbols? Isn't this symbol to be eliminated, > > > > > too? > > > > > > > > Simon? > > > > > > If we do eliminate DM it will be in a separate series. Like Tom I am > > > pleasantly surprised at how close we are. > > > > > > But please let's consider patches on their merits. It is fine to reply > > > with a wishlist but even better to reply with a follow-up patch. > > > > OK. So, build-wise, EFI_LOADER does not require OF_CONTROL. > > I strongly believe it should (and it should have 5 years ago too). New > features should not be built on pre-migration stuff.
Well, what legacy interfaces is it using? That's something to figure out and address as needed. > > > Somewhat related, I think we need to create a separate symbol which > > > means (OF_CONTROL && !OF_PLATDATA) so we can just check one thing. > > > > > > Also I think we should push of-platdata, since otherwise we're going > > > to hit the same problem of migrating SPL boards to DM one day. > > > > Note that we don't have CONFIG_OF_PLATDATA just > > CONFIG_(SPL|TPL)_OF_PLATDATA. > > Indeed. But we haven't defined it because we don't want to permit it. > It is just for constrained environments and we assume that U-Boot > proper has enough space (how else could it load Linux?) If OF_PLATDATA for U-Boot itself makes sense or not is a separate discussion to have. > > > > > lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c is the only place where we maintain > > > > > duplicate > > > > > code for DM and non-DM. A dependency on CONFIG_BLK (which itself > > > > > depends > > > > > on CONFIG_DM) would make more sense to me. But only in a patch > > > > > eliminating the non-BLK code. > > > > > > > > I just know that off-hand, partition + disk + block has some corner > > > > case, but maybe that corner case is unintentional in terms of usage > > > > today. > > > > > > > > > > > ARM && (SYS_CPU = arm1136 || \ > > > > > > > SYS_CPU = arm1176 || \ > > > > > > > SYS_CPU = armv7 || \ > > > > > > > @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ config EFI_LOADER > > > > > > > will expose the UEFI API to a loaded application, > > > > > > > enabling it to > > > > > > > reuse U-Boot's device drivers. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + For ARM 32-bit, this adds about 90KB to the size of U-Boot. > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > > There is no unit ISO prefix K. Do you mean KiB? > > > > > > > > > > 90 KiB may be the value today. Will you update it regularly? Otherwise > > > > > don't put a number here. > > > > > > > > > > I can't see that the effect on size is truly architecture specific. > > > > > Why > > > > > do you refer to 32bit ARM? > > > > > > > > > > Such a comment would better fit into a documentation chapter on > > > > > downsizing U-Boot. > > > > > > > > Yes, we should probably drop that specific note. > > > > > > From my POV I really like these notes in Kconfig. They appear in a few > > > places and provide people with rough guidance. I'd like to see more of > > > them. I don't know how we can keep them up-to-date, although I'd argue > > > that they should stay constant, if we are holding to our no-bloat > > > ideal. > > > > I feel like EFI gets a bit of an undeserved reputation here. It's not > > growing any worse than the rest of the world is over fixes and error > > correction (which is to say, 16/32/40 bytes here and there). And > > there's not "big" new default features coming in. > > We can agree on the 'reputation' bit but I can't think of a more > deserving feature :-) > > I keep getting the capsule-update series in my inbox, for example and > I know there is TPM stuff in the works. Yes, but TPM and capsule-update won't be default enabled for all platforms. I run every PR I get (and branch I make and merge) through a before/after world build and use buildman's sizes tools to check (aside, I'd love some csv output format for that, but I haven't gotten around to thinking on how to do that) and that's where I'm coming from on this. I am keeping an eye out for default new features everywhere, and default new functionality everywhere. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
