2015-12-25 12:25 GMT+03:00 Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de>: > Am 25.12.2015 um 10:02 schrieb Alexander Graf: > [snip] >> The reason I implemented "bootefi" was really because it's the natural >> fit into how U-Boot handles all other formats today. I don't think this >> is going to be the last patch set around EFI support. > > I think what Matwey was suggesting is integrating your "bootefi" into > the standard "distro" boot sequence environment, so that it probes each > device for an EFI binary and if it finds one runs load and bootefi, > without the need for any boot.scr.
I have no problem if boot{arm,a64,x64}.efi search is implemented via standard bootscript. But I like idea about extlinux.conf too. > > That would be a follow-up patch. > > It however conflicts with your idea of having some potentially > board-specific code mess with "fdt addr" command before running "bootefi". > > My solution would be to give boot.scr preference over *.efi, so that the > user has a way to load dtb and run "bootefi" on his own, and otherwise > fall back to just "bootefi" which'll spit a warning about lack of fdt if > I read that correctly. > Yeah, dtb should be anyhow controlled by the user to make workarounds possible. Funny story about how u-boot detects dtb: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-December/237604.html > Cheers, > Andreas > > -- > SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany > GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- With best regards, Matwey V. Kornilov http://blog.matwey.name xmpp://0x2...@jabber.ru _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot