On Sun, 25 Feb 2024 at 14:23, Mark Kettenis <mark.kette...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> > From: Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com>
> > Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2024 14:14:55 +0000
> >
> > The EFI spec states that the ESP can be any of FAT12/16/32 but for
> > compatibility doesn't necssarily require the partition to be the
> > EFI partition table ID of 0xef. A number of arm devices will not
> > find their firmware on a FAT partition with an ID of 0xef so also
> > allow the original FAT12/16/32 partition IDs as they are also
> > permissable for an ESP.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >
> > v2:
> > - Add 0x0c option
> > - Make hex constants consistent
> > - Move from if to switch statement
>
> Erh...
>
> > disk/part_dos.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/disk/part_dos.c b/disk/part_dos.c
> > index 567ead7511d..ab855adf347 100644
> > --- a/disk/part_dos.c
> > +++ b/disk/part_dos.c
> > @@ -40,10 +40,23 @@ static int get_bootable(dos_partition_t *p)
> > {
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > - if (p->sys_ind == 0xef)
> > + switch (p->sys_ind){
> > + case 0x01:
> > ret |= PART_EFI_SYSTEM_PARTITION;
> > - if (p->boot_ind == 0x80)
> > + case 0x06:
> > + ret |= PART_EFI_SYSTEM_PARTITION;
> > + case 0x0b:
> > + ret |= PART_EFI_SYSTEM_PARTITION;
> > + case 0x0c:
> > + ret |= PART_EFI_SYSTEM_PARTITION;
> > + case 0xef:
> > + ret |= PART_EFI_SYSTEM_PARTITION;
> > + case 0x80:
> > ret |= PART_BOOTABLE;
> > + default:
> > + break;
> > + }
> > +
>
> That really didn't go well. The 0x80 check was for a different struct
> member and there are missing break statements. And I suppose the
> suggestion to use a switch was to bunch up the EFI partition type
> cases.
>
> ENOCOFFEE?
It was worse, no coffee and an early start for a flight.... OOPS!
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.43.2
> >
> >
