[PATCH v2 2/2] sandbox: add bootmethod EFI boot-manager

[Tom Rini]

On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 02:17:36PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Heinrich,
> 
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 at 11:26, Heinrich Schuchardt
> <heinrich.schuchardt at canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/18/24 19:21, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > Hi Heinrich,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 at 19:18, Heinrich Schuchardt
> > > <heinrich.schuchardt at canonical.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> The EFI boot-manager is the default method to boot EFI binaries.
> > >> We should be able to use it on the Sandbox.
> > >>
> > >> * Enable EFI boot-manager bootmethod on the sandbox.
> > >> * Adjust unit tests to reflect the additional boot method.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <heinrich.schuchardt at canonical.com>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Mattijs Korpershoek <mkorpershoek at baylibre.com>
> > >> ---
> > >> v2:
> > >>          no changes
> > >> ---
> > >>   arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts |  4 ++++
> > >>   test/boot/bootmeth.c      | 28 +++++++++++++++++-----------
> > >>   2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > This is better, but I still see this.
> > >
> > > => bootflow scan
> > >       efi_var_to_file() Cannot persist EFI variables without system partition
> > >
> > > Please find a way to get rid of it. I can give some suggestions if you like.
> > >
> >
> > Would you, please, mind providing a rationale why you want this correct
> > message not to be written.
> >
> > I expect the sandbox to behave as any other board and provide warnings
> > when they are adequate.
> 
> Well, what I am supposed to do to fix this warning? I just don't want
> unactionable messages coming up in bootstd.
> 
> If it happens all the time and cannot be fixed, you could add an
> option to the driver to ignore it, which can be controlled from the
> devicetree node.

So, you're scanning a disk image to boot from, and it lacks a system
partition. Can you describe how you're creating this disk image? And are
you testing something EFI related, or not? And then Heinrich, can we be
checking for variables any later than we do today?

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 659 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20241018/8546c207/attachment.sig>