Hi Alex, On 19 October 2016 at 01:07, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: > > > On 18/10/2016 22:37, Simon Glass wrote: >> Hi Alex, >> >> On 4 October 2016 at 09:50, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Am 04.10.2016 um 17:37 schrieb Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>: >>> >>> Hi Alex, >>> >>> On 3 October 2016 at 21:15, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Am 03.10.2016 um 23:50 schrieb Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>: >>> >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> >>> On 27 September 2016 at 15:28, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 09:36:19AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 25.09.16 23:27, Simon Glass wrote: >>> >>> >>> It is useful to have a basic sanity check for EFI loader support. Add a >>> >>> >>> 'bootefi hello' command which loads HelloWord.efi and runs it under U-Boot. >>> >>> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >>> >>> >>> --- >>> >>> >>> >>> Changes in v2: None >>> >>> >>> >>> arch/arm/lib/HelloWorld32.efi | Bin 0 -> 11712 bytes >>> >>> >>> >>> IIRC U-Boot as a whole is GPL licensed, which means that any binaries >>> >>> >>> shipped inside would also need to be GPL compatibly licensed which again >>> >>> >>> means that the source code (and build instructions?) for this .efi file >>> >>> >>> would need to be part of the tree, no? >>> >>> >>> >>> Yeah, I'm not super comfortable with this. >>> >>> >>> >>> Do you think we should drop these binary patches? I could always put >>> >>> the binaries somewhere along with instructions on how to get them. >>> >>> >>> >>> I think that's the best option, yes. You can always just add a url to the >>> >>> readme to point people into the right direction. >>> >>> >>> OK. One problem is that we cannot write a test for it unless we >>> actually run an EFI application. >>> >>> >>> Well, you could always provide a binary disk image that you run in qemu as >>> test case. That one doesn't have to be gpl compliant thn because it's not >>> derived work :). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> I do think it is useful to be able to test the platform though. >>> >>> >>> >>> I don't disagree, but I would argue that for the average u-boot user it >>> >>> brings no additional value ;). And people like you who know how to enable a >>> >>> new architecture probably also know how to get a file into their target's >>> >>> memory. >>> >>> >>> I wonder if we can build our own hello world application? I think I >>> did it once. But there is EFI library code that we would need to bring >>> in (perhaps a small amount). >>> >>> >>> We could. The main problem is the PE header. >> >> What is tricky about that? > > Our compiler usually generates elf files, no PE binaries. So we'd have > to assemble the PE header ourselves - or rely on a second compiler.
I think I'm going to go with the first option which seems easy enough. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
