[U-Boot] [PATCH 6/6] efi_loader: Display which .dtb we found

[Andreas Färber]

Am 12.07.2016 um 16:25 schrieb Alexander Graf:
> On 12.07.16 14:45, Andreas Färber wrote:
>> Am 12.07.2016 um 09:30 schrieb Alexander Graf:
>>> On 12.07.16 06:21, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>>> We do so for the EFI binary already and it aids debugging.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber at suse.de>
>>>> ---
>>>>  include/config_distro_bootcmd.h | 4 ++++
>>>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>>>> index 8f14457..0cf74e2 100644
>>>> --- a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>>>> +++ b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h
>>>> @@ -149,6 +149,10 @@
>>>>  					"${prefix}${dtb_prefix}"          \
>>>>  					"${dtb_vendor_prefix}"            \
>>>>  					"${efi_fdtfile}; then "           \
>>>> +					"echo Found ${prefix}"            \
>>>
>>> As mentioned in the other reply, I think this message is very useful,
>>> but should contain the target device name as well, so that we don't need
>>> to print out a message for every single partition we scan :).
>>
>> I originally had it that way, but remember that issues like with patches
>> 4 and 5 will not lead to any Found message at all. Therefore I still
>> prefer decoupling the two.
> 
> We do detect the case where we don't have a working fdt loaded already,
> so we could probably print out the search paths there if we don't find a
> working fdt?

Feel free to make a follow-up patch...

>> Btw where does the "reading efi/boot/bootaa64.efi" message come from?
>> That one could be dropped as duplicate instead! :)
> 
> Phew. The "load" command maybe?

Then why isn't it printing the same for the .dtb files? :)
Maybe it's some FAT debug thing?

Andreas

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)