On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 01:54:51PM +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > On 01/17/19 11:22, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > Hi, > > > >>>>>> create mode 100644 pc-bios/avmf.img > >>>>>> create mode 100644 pc-bios/avmf_vars.img > >>>>> > >>>>> "AVMF" is not a great name. "AAVMF" is a downstream name alright, but > >>>>> many dislike it in upstream use. "edk2-aarch64" or "edk2-ArmVirtQemu" > >>>>> would be more precise, but those are verbose. Sigh, why are names so > >>>>> hard. What does everyone think? > >>>> I'm fine with either version. > > > > How about placing them in pc-bios/efi-$arch subdirs and not renaming the > > files, i.e. that would be ... > > > > pc-bios/efi-aarch64/QEMU_EFI.fd > > pc-bios/efi-aarch64/QEMU_VARS.fd > > > > ... for arm, and ... > > > > pc-bios/efi-x86_64/OVMF_CODE.fd > > pc-bios/efi-x86_64/OVMF_VARS.fd > > > > ... for x86. > > That sounds good to me. One thing to note is that the arm/aarch64 images > have to be padded to 64MB, so I generally append ".padded" to those file > names. Would that be OK? Any better ideas?
Ah, right, the arm versions can't be used as-is with pflash. In my rpm builds I've named the padded version "QEMU_EFI-pflash.raw". Using .padded looks fine to me too. Other idea: Does it make sense to use qcow2 for the pflash images? i.e. "qemu-img create -f qcow2 -b QEMU_EFI.fd -F raw QEMU_EFI.qcow2 64M"? cheers, Gerd
