Sunny, For the OS recovery question, I had the code change in https://github.com/niruiyu/edk2/tree/bds/osrecovery.
Due to there is no OS support for OS recovery yet, the code was not pushed. Do you see any needs of the OS recovery? Thanks, Ray > -----Original Message----- > From: Wang, Sunny (HPS SW) <sunnyw...@hpe.com> > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 3:42 PM > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Zhichao <zhichao....@intel.com>; Ni, Ray > <ray...@intel.com> > Cc: Wang, Jian J <jian.j.w...@intel.com>; Wu, Hao A <hao.a...@intel.com>; > Zeng, Star <star.z...@intel.com>; Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>; > Sean Brogan <sean.bro...@microsoft.com>; Michael Turner > <michael.tur...@microsoft.com>; Bret Barkelew > <bret.barke...@microsoft.com>; Li, Walon <walon...@hpe.com>; Wei, Kent > (HPS SW) <kent....@hpe.com>; Spottswood, Jason > <jason.spottsw...@hpe.com>; Wang, Sunny (HPS SW) > <sunnyw...@hpe.com> > Subject: RE: [edk2-devel] Use a pcd to control PlatformRecovery > > Thanks for checking this, Zhichao and Ray. > I just sent a patch to fix it with the subject " [edk2-devel] [PATCH] > MdeModulePkg/BdsDxe: Make PlatformRecovery work regardless of > OsIndications" > > Regards, > Sunny Wang > > -----Original Message----- > From: devel@edk2.groups.io [mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io] On Behalf Of > Gao, Zhichao > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 1:57 PM > To: Wang, Sunny (HPS SW) <sunnyw...@hpe.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; > Ni, Ray <ray...@intel.com> > Cc: Wang, Jian J <jian.j.w...@intel.com>; Wu, Hao A <hao.a...@intel.com>; > Zeng, Star <star.z...@intel.com>; Gao, Liming <liming....@intel.com>; > Sean Brogan <sean.bro...@microsoft.com>; Michael Turner > <michael.tur...@microsoft.com>; Bret Barkelew > <bret.barke...@microsoft.com>; Li, Walon <walon...@hpe.com>; Wei, Kent > (HPS SW) <kent....@hpe.com> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Use a pcd to control PlatformRecovery > Importance: High > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gao, Zhichao > > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 10:09 AM > > To: 'Wang, Sunny (HPS SW)' <sunnyw...@hpe.com>; > devel@edk2.groups.io; > > Ni, Ray <ray...@intel.com> > > Cc: Wang, Jian J <jian.j.w...@intel.com>; Wu, Hao A > > <hao.a...@intel.com>; Zeng, Star <star.z...@intel.com>; Gao, Liming > > <liming....@intel.com>; Sean Brogan <sean.bro...@microsoft.com>; > > Michael Turner <michael.tur...@microsoft.com>; Bret Barkelew > > <bret.barke...@microsoft.com>; Li, Walon <walon...@hpe.com>; Wei, > Kent > > (HPS SW) <kent....@hpe.com> > > Subject: RE: Use a pcd to control PlatformRecovery > > > > First of all, the patch didn't aim to change the other part of the > > boot flow except PlatformRecovery. > > > > Local variable PlatformRecovery is controlled by OsIndications > > variable. When the EFI_OS_INDICATIONS_START_PLATFORM_RECOVERY is > set, > > the firmware should try to platform specific recovery. But that > > doesn't mean the platform must support the specific recovery. i.e. > > local PlatformRecovery is controlling the boot flow and the Pcd just > > indicated whether the platform support recovery or not. > > So, on my opinion, I don't agree with your change. > > After discuss with Sunny and Ray, and refer to the spec section 3.4.1 and > 3.4.2, the OsRecovery and PlatformRecovery should always be operated > regardless of the value of OsIndication variable if fail to boot the > BootOrder. I > am wrong. We should change to use the PcdPlatformRecoverySupport to > control the PlatformRecovery. Please help to send a patch to fix it. Thanks a > lot. > > > > > Default Platform Recovery refer to the short file path to boot the OS. > > If the firmware supports platform recovery, then *short file path* > > option would be one part of the PlatformRecovery#### in case there are > > no other boot options. If the firmware doesn't support platform > > recovery, we still need this default boot thru a short file path and > > it should not depend on the PlatformRecovery#### variable for the > compatibility thinking. > > > > Thanks, > > Zhichao > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Wang, Sunny (HPS SW) [mailto:sunnyw...@hpe.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 4:53 PM > > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; Gao, Zhichao <zhichao....@intel.com>; Ni, > > > Ray <ray...@intel.com> > > > Cc: Wang, Jian J <jian.j.w...@intel.com>; Wu, Hao A > > > <hao.a...@intel.com>; Zeng, Star <star.z...@intel.com>; Gao, Liming > > > <liming....@intel.com>; Sean Brogan <sean.bro...@microsoft.com>; > > > Michael Turner <michael.tur...@microsoft.com>; Bret Barkelew > > > <bret.barke...@microsoft.com>; Li, Walon <walon...@hpe.com>; Wei, > > Kent > > > (HPS SW) <kent....@hpe.com>; Wang, Sunny (HPS SW) > > <sunnyw...@hpe.com> > > > Subject: Use a pcd to control PlatformRecovery > > > > > > Hi Zhichao and Ray, > > > > > > I have some questions about this code change. Sorry for being late > > > to bring my questions here. > > > > > > For now, the code block for iterating the PlatformRecovery#### > > > variables is controlled by OsIndications variable. However, it looks > > > to me like that the PlatformRecovery#### should still be attempted > > > for the case of that processing of BootOrder does NOT result in > > > success (according to section 3.4 in UEFI 2.8). In other words, I > > > think we should check PCD "PcdPlatformRecoverySupport" instead of > > > Local variable > > "PlatformRecovery" > > > (from OsIndications variable) like the code below. What do you guys > > > think? If you need a meeting or short talk to discuss this, feel > > > free to let me > > know. > > > > > > if (!BootSuccess) { > > > - if (PlatformRecovery) { > > > + if (PcdGetBool (PcdPlatformRecoverySupport)) { > > > LoadOptions = EfiBootManagerGetLoadOptions (&LoadOptionCount, > > > LoadOptionTypePlatformRecovery); > > > ProcessLoadOptions (LoadOptions, LoadOptionCount); > > > EfiBootManagerFreeLoadOptions (LoadOptions, LoadOptionCount); > > > } else { > > > // > > > // When platform recovery is not enabled, still boot to > > > platform default file path. > > > // > > > EfiBootManagerProcessLoadOption (&PlatformDefaultBootOption); > > > } > > > > > > > > > In addition, it looks like EDK2 don't have code to process > > > OsRecovery#### variables. Do we need to create a Bug on TianoCore > > Bugzilla system? > > OsRecovery#### doesn't have an implement yet, we should co-work with > the OS vendor to define the operation. For now, there is no requirement. > > > > > > > Moreover, I saw that both of you had a discussion about "Default > > > PlatformRecovery", but I can't figure out the connection between the > > > discussion and the final code change. Isn't the "Default > PlatformRecovery" > > > part of the Platform Recovery feature? At this moment, we don't have > > > OS recovery support, so I think that NO platform recovery support > > > can be identified as NO boot option recovery support. For this case, > > > shouldn't we use PCD "PcdPlatformRecoverySupport" to control > > > "Default PlatformRecovery" as well? For the next step, I think we > > > need to get further clarification from USWG to either not tie > > > "Default Boot Behavior" with PlatformRecovery or update the > > > description to the > > following: > > > - If system firmware supports Platform recovery as described in > > > Section 3.4.2, system firmware must include a PlatformRecovery#### > > > variable specifying a short-form File Path Media Device Path.... > > As I said above the 'Default Platform Recovery' refer to the short-form file > path boot. When the PcdPlatformRecoverySupport is TRUE, it is part of > PlatformRecovery. Ohterwise, it is not part of platform recovery and we still > need to support it because of the capability issue. And that isn't conflict > with > the spec. > > Thanks, > Zhichao > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Sunny Wang > > > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#49078): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/49078 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/34543609/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
