On 07/08/2015 07:24 AM, Leif Lindholm wrote: > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 12:59:12PM +0000, Meenakshi Aggarwal wrote: >> This is my first query on this list. I apologize for any mistake.
This is also my first query on the list. :-) >> Is this patch tested? > > Yes. > >> Also I want to know the underline firmware volume on which this >> patch has been tested? > > We verified it (at least) on the microSD card on the Samsung Arndale > board. Forgetting the licensing issue, would the Ext2 FS driver need to be embedded in the main firmware volume, or could it be in a .efi file in a FAT-based ESP? I am wondering if it'd be technically possible for a system with a main firmware volume that only recognizes FAT would be able to load and use the Ext2 FS driver, since most IBVs only ship FAT support (except Apple which apparently supports both FAT and HFS+) for ESP. What about UDF for non-FAT ESP FS? UDF was checked into TianoCore a while ago, so BSD licensed. Unlike FAT, I am not aware of any UDF IP issues. UDF has OS-level FS/tool issues, but some of those edge cases could be fixed. UDF also supports large files, which would be useful for some pre-OS config issues where you need to mess with .ISO or .img files to setup a system, FAT-only FS support would be not helpful. Mainstream IBVs will not likely support a Linux-only FS, but UDF is a lot more neutral and less scary, Microsoft already supports UDF. Anyway, just a thought, for a more IP-free ESP FS... http://sourceforge.net/p/edk2/mailman/message/33187675/ Thanks, Lee RSS: http://firmwaresecurity.com/feed _______________________________________________ boot-architecture mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture
