Date
1 - 9 of 9
RFC: Boot Discovery Policy
|
Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...>
Hi,
I would like to ask you for review of following proposal. It will allow the user to specify which devices should be connected at the boot. User selection will be saved in variable and Boot Manager Policy Protocol will be used to connect specified devices. Design can be found at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OiQrXuQT9wfr8hPahzXcPj6mMszGPQUw/view?usp=sharing thanks, greg |
|
|
|
Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...>
Adding reviewers and ARM into the loop...
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Ray, Zhichao, Can I ask you to review the design and let me know if you got any comments. thanks greg czw., 29 kwi 2021 o 10:11 Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...> napisał(a):
|
|
|
|
Ni, Ray
greg,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I reviewed your design and learned several points: 1. UiApp adds an option to let user select which class to connect [ray] can you explain which UiApp your design changes? the one in MdeModulePkg? can you investigate whether it's doable to produce such setup option through another driver? 2. bcfg adds an option to let user select which class to connect [ray] you need to discuss with USWG on the bcfg shell command change. 3. The option added above controls the PlatformBootManagerLib behavior [ray] This lib belongs to platform scope so you can freely change it as long as the platform owner agrees. Thanks, ray -----Original Message----- |
|
|
|
Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...>
Hi Ray,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Thanks a lot for review. Regarding comment #1. I proposed two options: 1) Change directly MdeModulePkg/Library/BootMaintenanceManagerUiLib and add an Boot Discovery Policy entry in 'Boot Maintenance Manager' menu or 2) Add a new library which uses EFI_IFR_BOOT_MAINTENANCE_GUID classguid and allow Boot Maintanance Manager to connect it via BmmListThirdPartyDrivers(). However, drawback of that solution is creation of a new form with Boot Discovery Policy drop-down list Second option uses separate library. What is your opinion on above? thanks, greg czw., 29 kwi 2021 o 14:58 Ni, Ray <ray.ni@...> napisał(a):
|
|
|
|
Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...>
Adding RPI maintainers...
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Ard, Leif, Pete, Can I ask you for you comments on the design? thanks, greg czw., 29 kwi 2021 o 13:19 Grzegorz Bernacki via groups.io <gjb@...> napisał(a):
|
|
|
|
Sunny Wang
For Ard, Pete, and Leif's reference, this is the follow-up to my Fast Boot related commit https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-platforms/commit/efdc159ef7c9f15581a0f63d755a1530ff475156. We want to add the setup option to the core code instead of the platform code so that we can easily solve similar problems that are related to Fast boot in other platforms as well. Therefore, I think RPI should be fine with this design.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Best Regards, Sunny Wang -----Original Message-----
From: Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2021 9:43 PM To: rfc@edk2.groups.io; Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...> Cc: Samer El-Haj-Mahmoud <Samer.El-Haj-Mahmoud@...>; Sunny Wang <Sunny.Wang@...>; Marcin Wojtas <mw@...>; zhichao.gao@...; ray.ni@...; pete@...; leif@...; ardb+tianocore@... Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] RFC: Boot Discovery Policy Adding RPI maintainers... Ard, Leif, Pete, Can I ask you for you comments on the design? thanks, greg czw., 29 kwi 2021 o 13:19 Grzegorz Bernacki via groups.io <gjb@...> napisał(a): IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. |
|
|
|
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...>
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 15:54, Sunny Wang <Sunny.Wang@...> wrote:
So the problem is secondary loaders that assume that all peripherals have been connected, right? To me, the options Minimal/All Network Devices/All Devices seems a bit arbitrary - what about block devices? |
|
|
|
Sunny Wang
Hi Ard,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Thanks for checking this. Yeah, you're right if the secondary loaders you meant here are OS boot loaders and some applications for system deployment like iPXE. This change is based on EFI_BOOT_MANAGER_POLICY_PROTOCOL which currently only supports EFI_BOOT_MANAGER_POLICY_NETWORK_GUID and EFI_BOOT_MANAGER_POLICY_CONNECT_ALL_GUID classes, so it only has Minimal, All Network Devices, All Devices options for using the existing classes and code. For block devices, if you see a need, I think you can submit a Code-first Bugzilla ticket and UEFI ECR for the follow-up (adding EFI_BOOT_MANAGER_POLICY_BLOCK_GUID). What do you think? Best Regards, Sunny Wang -----Original Message-----
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...> Sent: Saturday, May 8, 2021 1:37 AM To: Sunny Wang <Sunny.Wang@...> Cc: Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...>; rfc@edk2.groups.io; Samer El-Haj-Mahmoud <Samer.El-Haj-Mahmoud@...>; Marcin Wojtas <mw@...>; zhichao.gao@...; ray.ni@...; pete@...; leif@...; ardb+tianocore@... Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] RFC: Boot Discovery Policy On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 at 15:54, Sunny Wang <Sunny.Wang@...> wrote: So the problem is secondary loaders that assume that all peripherals have been connected, right? To me, the options Minimal/All Network Devices/All Devices seems a bit arbitrary - what about block devices? IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. |
|
|
|
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...>
On Mon, 10 May 2021 at 09:27, Sunny Wang <Sunny.Wang@...> wrote:
If it matches the current spec definitional (however surprisingly), I am fine with the current proposal. -----Original Message----- |
|
|