[U-Boot] [PATCH] disk: part_efi: add support for the Alternate GPT
Steve Rae
srae at broadcom.com
Mon May 5 20:26:44 CEST 2014
Hmmm - perhaps "Secondary" would be more accurate wording than "Alternate"
(v2 coming...)
On 14-05-05 09:12 AM, Steve Rae wrote:
>
> On 14-05-05 03:50 AM, Przemyslaw Marczak wrote:
>> Hello Steve,
>>
>> On 04/30/2014 12:31 AM, Steve Rae wrote:
>>> Check the Alternate GPT table if the Primary GPT table is invalid.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Steve Rae <srae at broadcom.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> disk/part_efi.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
>>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/disk/part_efi.c b/disk/part_efi.c
>>> index 216a292..ad899fa 100644
>>> --- a/disk/part_efi.c
>>> +++ b/disk/part_efi.c
>>> @@ -93,7 +93,15 @@ void print_part_efi(block_dev_desc_t * dev_desc)
>>> if (is_gpt_valid(dev_desc, GPT_PRIMARY_PARTITION_TABLE_LBA,
>>> gpt_head, &gpt_pte) != 1) {
>>> printf("%s: *** ERROR: Invalid GPT ***\n", __func__);
>>> - return;
>>> + if (is_gpt_valid(dev_desc, (dev_desc->lba - 1),
>>> + gpt_head, &gpt_pte) != 1) {
>>> + printf("%s: *** ERROR: Invalid Alternate GPT ***\n",
>>> + __func__);
>>> + return;
>>> + } else {
>>> + printf("%s: *** Using Alternate GPT ***\n",
>>> + __func__);
>>> + }
>>> }
>>>
>>> debug("%s: gpt-entry at %p\n", __func__, gpt_pte);
>>> @@ -142,7 +150,15 @@ int get_partition_info_efi(block_dev_desc_t *
>>> dev_desc, int part,
>>> if (is_gpt_valid(dev_desc, GPT_PRIMARY_PARTITION_TABLE_LBA,
>>> gpt_head, &gpt_pte) != 1) {
>>> printf("%s: *** ERROR: Invalid GPT ***\n", __func__);
>>> - return -1;
>>> + if (is_gpt_valid(dev_desc, (dev_desc->lba - 1),
>>> + gpt_head, &gpt_pte) != 1) {
>>> + printf("%s: *** ERROR: Invalid Alternate GPT ***\n",
>>> + __func__);
>>> + return -1;
>>> + } else {
>>> + printf("%s: *** Using Alternate GPT ***\n",
>>> + __func__);
>>> + }
>>> }
>>>
>>> if (part > le32_to_cpu(gpt_head->num_partition_entries) ||
>>>
>>
>> This looks ok, we can still use u-boot filesystem commands after gpt
>> header block corruption, but the gpt is still...corrupted.
>>
>> Maybe we need additional gpt subcommand for restore gpt in case when
>> backup of gpt header is valid?
>>
>> Actually we have only "gpt write" command but it needs proper
>> environment variables. So I think that "gpt restore" is welcome.
>>
>> Thank you,
> Agree -- maybe I can find time to work on a "gpt restore" in the near
> future....
> Thanks, Steve
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
>
>
More information about the U-Boot
mailing list