Am April 27, 2020 8:58:57 PM UTC schrieb Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de>: >Am April 27, 2020 8:52:43 PM UTC schrieb Ard Biesheuvel ><a...@kernel.org>: >>On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 22:47, Ard Biesheuvel <a...@kernel.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 22:47, Heinrich Schuchardt >><xypron.g...@gmx.de> wrote: >>> > >>> > Am April 27, 2020 7:39:38 PM UTC schrieb Ard Biesheuvel >><a...@kernel.org>: >>> > >On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 at 21:36, Heinrich Schuchardt >><xypron.g...@gmx.de> >>> > >wrote: >>> > >> >>> > >> On 4/27/20 1:01 PM, Daniel Kiper wrote: >>> > >> > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 08:15:41AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel >>wrote: >>> > >> >> On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 at 21:40, Atish Patra >><atish.pa...@wdc.com> >>> > >wrote: >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> This series adds grub loader support for RISC-V Linux. >>Thanks to >>> > >the awesome >>> > >> >>> initial RISC-V support added by Alex, we just needed a >>loader for >>> > >RISC-V to >>> > >> >>> load and execute Linux using UEFI protocol. >>> > >> >>> >>> > >> >>> Fortunately, ARM64 Linux loader is written in an >>architecture >>> > >agnostic manner >>> > >> >>> so thatgeneric RISC-V can easily reuse the loader code. >>Thus, the >>> > >first patch >>> > >> >>> just moves the ARM64 code to common code. I have compile >>tested >>> > >for >>> > >> >>> ARM64/ARM32. Even though it doesn't introduce any >functional >>> > >change >>> > >> >>> for ARM/ARM64, any real testing will be helpful. >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> May I suggest that we not blindly adopt the ARM code here, >>but >>> > >> >> instead, use the new initrd loading protocol that removes >the >>need >>> > >for >>> > >> >> GRUB to modify or even know about the device tree at all? >>> > >> >>> > >> Does this protocol exist in EDK2 by now? >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > >Yes. It exists as a shell command, and as a load option for OVMF. >>> > > >>> > >> In U-Boot there is a basic implementation which can provide a >>single >>> > >> initrd image with a hardcoded file name. The file_path argument >>> > >passed >>> > >> to U-Boot is ignored due to Ilias' security concerns when he >>wrote >>> > >the >>> > >> patch. >>> > >> >>> > >> GRUB is only needed if we have multiple kernels to choose from >>with >>> > >> distinct initial ramdisks. >>> > >> >>> > >> Please, describe what you expect the initrd loading protocol to >>do >>> > >when >>> > >> called from GRUB. How will the ramdisk fitting the kernel >chosen >>in >>> > >GRUB >>> > >> be identified? >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > >The same what GRUB's 'initrd' command does. Whichever initrd you >>> > >select with it is the one that gets returned by the protocol. >>> > >>> > Will GRUB provide the absolute device path in parameter file_path? >>> > >>> >>> Which parameter 'file_path" is that? >> >>Ah, I guess you mean the LoadFile2 argument? That is always >>end-of-device-path in this case, since the initrd device path only >>consists of the vendor media GUID. >> >>The thing to keep in mind here is that the OS does not *choose* an >>initrd, it simply loads the one that the bootloader has staged for it. > >How should U-Boot know which initrd fits the kernel chosen by the user >in GRUB? That information exists in grub.cfg only. > >If GRUB cannot provide this information, what is GRUB's added value in >the boot process?
Hello Ard, Did I misunderstand you and you want to provide a LOAD_FILE2 implementation in GRUB and not use the one in the firmware? Regards Heinrich _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
