HI Simon On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 14:36, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Hi François, > > On Tue, 28 Dec 2021 at 03:15, François Ozog <francois.o...@linaro.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Le mar. 28 déc. 2021 à 09:32, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> a écrit : > >> > >> Hi Masahisa, > >> > >> On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 00:37, Masahisa Kojima > >> <masahisa.koj...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi Takahiro, > >> > > >> > On Tue, 21 Dec 2021 at 11:47, Takahiro Akashi > >> > <takahiro.aka...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 06:25:05PM +0900, Masahisa Kojima wrote: > >> > > > Hi Heinrich, Ilias, Akashi-san, > >> > > > > >> > > > Ilias and I are now discussing to create efi bootmenu, almost > similar > >> > > > to UiApp in EDK2. > >> > > > >> > > Why not discuss this topic openly in ML? > >> > > >> > Yes, I included U-Boot ML.(Sorry, I should include from the the > beginning.) > >> > > >> > > > >> > > How is this feature related to Simon's bootmethod proposal? > >> > > >> > If I correctly understand Simon's bootmethod proposal, > >> > the difference is that efi bootmenu only targets to implement > >> > the menu based UI to select/edit/add/delete "Boot####" and > "BootOrder". > >> > >> Yes, EFI would be one of the bootmethods. Others would be U-Boot > >> scripts, Chrome OS, Android, etc. plus people might add custom ones. > >> > >> Also I am thinking that (perhaps) the bootdev part of the standard > >> boot thing could be used to provide boot devices for EFI. > >> > >> If we do have a bootmenu, I wonder if it could be generic, instead of > >> tied to EFI? > > > > EFI BootXXXX specify an array of device paths and boot options. A device > path is quite a unique construct despite its name. > > A device path is itself an array of elements, some elements can be a > file path , configuration information, or diverse metadata. An example of > configuration information element is UART baud,stop bits, parity along with > terminal (vt100, ansi…). Another device path element can cover IP address, > transport information (tcp, UDP and port number). > > The traditional EFI boot menu is quite crude and does not expose the > full capabilities of BootXXXX (lacks edit of boot options for instance!). > > > > In the long run we will need to leverage all the BootXXXX capabilities > and those are EFI specific while being OS agnostic. > > The other U-Boot boot methods (Android , ChromeOS…) are OS specific. > > The goals are thus very different and making a generic approach seems > quite compromised. If there is a fully generic framework available in the > future, it may be possible to integrate the EFI boot menu. But at least > there is a need to solve, code first, the EFI complexities to fuel the > generic architecture discussion. > > Despite this, the goal of standard boot is to encompass all of this > within U-Boot. I believe that it will be successful, even if the path > at present is a bit unclear. > So I would suggest we work bottom up. Starting by making EFI menu work, then extend it more generic or integrated it in a framework. Starting top down would require a long architecture process based on not enough known problems to solve for each environment. > > [..] > > Regards, > Simon > -- François-Frédéric Ozog | *Director Business Development* T: +33.67221.6485 francois.o...@linaro.org | Skype: ffozog
