[PATCH] smbios: Fix SMBIOS tables

[Simon Glass]

Hi Ilias,

On Sat, 26 Jun 2021 at 12:51, Ilias Apalodimas
<ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Simon,
>
> > > ---
> [...]
> > > This depends on https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2021-June/451761.html
> > >  lib/smbios.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > It is strange that all the boards that defined the old CONFIG set it
> > to "", meaning that an empty string is used. Was that just wrong?
>
> Yea I think so. In fact Heinrich fixed an identical error due to that on
> 00a871d34e2f

OK I see.

>
> >
> > In your patch you are using 'Unknown' and 'Unknown Product'. Should it
> > use CONFIG_SYS_VENDOR and CONFIG_SYS_BOARD instead?
>
> I don't have an issue with that, as long as they are defined for every board.
> I think already Tom pulled this though, but I can send a follow up.

I don't they are both defined for every board (the vast majority
though), but probably for every board that uses SMBIOS.

>
> >
> > Or should we actually fail (and return an error code), and require the
> > properties to be set by the board? It does not seem very useful to
> > have a meaningless string. Are these SMBIOS values ignored in Linux?
> >
>
> Well the problem is that those tables are marked as mandatory (section 6.2)
> So failing one would mean disable the entire thing.  Why dont we do something
> less intrusive?  I can send a follow up, popping a warning 'fix your dts
> and/or CONFIG_SYS_VENDOR/CONFIG_SYS_BOARD'.  Then we can rid of the fallback
> but keep the warning for future boards.

OK, I suppose that would have to be a run-time warning. I just worry
that no one will notice / fix it if the code builds and runs without
it.

>
> I am not aware of all the cases linux uses those.  I found the problem trying
> to enable fwupd and specifically the EFI capsule updates for the firmware.  In
> that case, fwupd is trying to find the 'EFI bit' in 'BIOS Characteristics
> Extension Byte 2'.  There were two things wrong, the bit was wrong and the
> tables were not installed at all.  With the two patches applied fwupd seems
> happy.

OK.

Regards,
Simon