Hi Ilias, On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 at 04:47, Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodi...@linaro.org> wrote: > > Hi all, > > On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 at 08:33, Masahisa Kojima > <masahisa.koj...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > Hi Heinrich, > > > > On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 23:52, Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de> > > wrote: > > > > > > On 16.10.23 15:00, Masahisa Kojima wrote: > > > > On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 21:46, Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de> > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> On 16.10.23 14:31, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > > > >>> Hi Heinrich, > > > >>> > > > >>> On Mon, 16 Oct 2023 at 10:06, Heinrich Schuchardt > > > >>> <xypron.g...@gmx.de> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Am 16. Oktober 2023 08:45:21 MESZ schrieb Masahisa Kojima > > > >>>> <masahisa.koj...@linaro.org>: > > > >>>>> Current efibootmgr automatically creates the > > > >>>>> boot options of all disks and partitions installing > > > >>>>> EFI_SIMPLE_FILE_SYSTEM_PROTOCOL. > > > >>>>> Some of the automatically created boot options are > > > >>>>> useless if the disk and partition does not have > > > >>>>> the default file(e.g. EFI/BOOT/BOOTAA64.EFI). > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> This commit only creates the boot option if the disk and > > > >>>>> partition have the default file so that system can directly > > > >>>>> boot from it. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I don't directly see the user benefit. > > > >>> > > > >>> The user can add an HTTP boot option now and the installer will > > > >>> automatically start. That would allow products to ship with a single > > > >>> boot option provisioned and run an installer on first boot > > > >> > > > >> This commit is not about HTTP. It changes how boot options for block > > > >> devices are created. > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> Reading all file systems will increase the boot time. Shouldn't we > > > >>>> avoid this? > > > >>> > > > >>> Any idea what would be an alternative? But when we added the > > > >>> automatic boot options we said we should avoid dynamic scanning and > > > >>> store results in a file. This is doing a similar thing. The only > > > >>> difference is that it mounts the iso image before adding the boot > > > >>> option. > > > >> > > > >> The alternative is to keep showing boot options for block devices even > > > >> if there is no BOOTxxxx.EFI file. > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> What does EDK II do? > > > >>> > > > >>> No Idea :) > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On my workstation I get generated boot options > > > >> > > > >> Boot0001* UEFI:CD/DVD Drive BBS(129,,0x0) > > > >> Boot0003* UEFI:Removable Device BBS(130,,0x0) > > > >> Boot0004* UEFI:Network Device BBS(131,,0x0) > > > >> > > > >> without any media inserted and without any PXE server available. > > > > > > > > It is just information about how the EDK2 works. > > > > When I attach the Fedora installation media on EDK2(OVMF), > > > > the automatically generated boot option is as follows. > > > > > > > > UEFI QEMU HARDDISK QM00001 : > > > > PciRoot(0x0)/Pci(0x1,0x1)/Ata(Primary,Master,0x0) > > > > > > An ATAPI drive typically is not removable. So I wonder why it is listed. > > > Did you set the removable flag on the command line? > > > > I guess it is not removable(actually I don't know how to set the > > device as removable). > > I just attached the iso image to QEMU with something like '-hda > > Fedora_netinst.iso". > > > > According to the EDK II implementation[1], the boot option is > > enumerated with the following order. > > 1. Removable BlockIo > > 2. Fixed BlockIo > > 3. Non-BlockIo SimpleFileSystem > > 4. LoadFile > > So boot option for the fixed device such as HDD is also automatically > > created. > > > > [1] > > https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/blob/master/MdeModulePkg/Library/UefiBootManagerLib/BmBoot.c#L2150 > > > > > > > > > > > > > When this boot option is selected, Fedora installer automatically > > > > starts. > > > > So EDK II is searching the default file on the fly. > > > > > > What is shown if you attach a medium without Bootaa64.efi? > > > > The same boot option is created. > > UEFI QEMU HARDDISK QM00001 : > > PciRoot(0x0)/Pci(0x1,0x1)/Ata(Primary,Master,0x0) > > I went back to reading the spec and I think Heinrich is right. We > don't need that check at all. Going through [0] paragraph 4 says > " This search occurs when the device path of the boot image listed in > any boot option points directly to an EFI_SIMPLE_FILE_SYSTEM_PROTOCOL > device and does not specify the exact file to load" > > So we should *only* add an automatic variable without the default > application. Our code in try_load_entry() will search for that >
Thank you for checking the UEFI specification and sorry for overlooking the above. So we will go back to the previous on the fly default application search. Thanks, Masahisa Kojima > [0] > https://uefi.org/specs/UEFI/2.10/03_Boot_Manager.html#load-option-processing > > Regards > /Ilias > > > > Thanks, > > Masahisa Kojima > > > > >
