On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 11:19:06AM -0500, Glenn Washburn wrote: > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 07:46:11 -0600 > dann frazier <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 07:31:38PM -0500, Glenn Washburn wrote: > > > Package: ovmf-ia32 > > > Version: 2020.11-4 > > > > > > Hello Maintainers, > > > > > > I'd like ovmf-ia32 to install a file useable by QEMU's -bios option. > > > Currently the package only installs OVMF32_CODE_4M.secboot.fd and > > > OVMF32_VARS_4M.fd, but I believe I need a file that combines both code > > > and vars. According to the wiki[1], I believe I can use the existing > > > files using "-drive if=pflash,..." options, but that is not a great > > > option for me. > > > > Can you elaborate more on your use case? While we do provide such an > > image for X64, that is for backwards-compatibility only. > > I'm working on GRUB2's test suite and it has tests that use QEMU for > many of its tests.
edk2's autopkgtest has a testing framework that tests OVMF32, and all the other archs, using -pflash. It also does tests with GRUB images (e.g. making sure signed versions work w/ SecureBoot enabled, unsigned versions do not). Let me know if it'd be useful to collaborate on that framework. Here's the main bit: https://salsa.debian.org/qemu-team/edk2/-/blob/debian/debian/python/UEFI/Qemu.py > Specifically, I need the combined firmware file when testing the > i386-efi target. Why? I mean, why can't that testing use a throw-away pflash image for VARS like we do in edk2 autopkgtesting? > Perhaps, I don't need a binary with combined code and vars. On the ARM > and ARM64 EFI targets, I can pass the AAVMF32_CODE.fd to -bios just > fine. So perhaps the IA32 firmware is built in such a way that the code > file requires the vars, but could be build to not require it? IOW, why > can't I just send the firmware CODE file to QEMU using -bios like I can > with ARM and ARM64? I don't know if or why OVMF*_CODE doesn't work with -bios. Separate CODE/VARS is the most flexible build (and what people should use in production), so that's what we provide. I'd need to be convinced that there's a good reason to increase the size of the ovmf-ia32 deb for all users to support -bios mode. > Also, I don't need the secure boot feature of the firmware. The wiki > leaves me with the suspicion that I may need to configure some of the > firmware variables before I can boot successfully. Perhaps that would > only be the case if I were wanting to boot with secure boot enabled. > > I'm also curious about the 4M in the file name. My guess is that it > indicates a build option. Could this be part of the equation? Please read through the README.Debian file (latest one from unstable). If that doesn't answer the above 2 points, let me know so I can clarify it there. -dann
