[PATCH v3 00/19] bootstd: Support recording images

[Simon Glass]

Hi Tom,

On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 10:17, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 07:38:04AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > On Sat, 18 Jan 2025 at 07:41, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 09:49:43PM -0800, Tony Dinh wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 8:32 PM Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Tom,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 at 10:22, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jan 16, 2025 at 08:52:38AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Tom,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2025 at 16:32, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > > > I'm referring to the whole bootmeth/bootflow/etc thing. Is this going to
> > > > > > > > be put to use by anyone / anywhere on PowerPC? M68K? MIPS? 32bit ARM is
> > > > > > > > a harder question there, which is also where this particular overflow
> > > > > > > > was.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm still not sure what you are saying. Are you wanting to disable
> > > > > > > bootstd by default / go back to distro scripts / force everyone to use
> > > > > > > EFI_LOADER / ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, I'm asking where it's appropriate to enable this new functionality
> > > > > > by default.  It certainly should be enabled on arm64 (there's new
> > > > > > designs) and riscv (there's new designs). It still ought to be enabled
> > > > > > on arm32 because we otherwise lack a easy way to say "new" arm32 (say
> > > > > > i.MX7) and not "old" arm32 (say i.MX23). What is the point of enabling
> > > > > > this on PowerPC for example? The active users there are (generally)
> > > > > > supporting legacy hardware and I have no idea how much they want to
> > > > > > change their boot process, once bootstd supports flash for example.
> > > > > > There's similar questions for everything else under arch/ as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > To me this is in fact two different questions.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. For PowerPC, m68k, MIPS, I suppose we can just disable BOOTSTD and wait for them to go away, if you are saying that they are behind on migrations will never catch up
> > >
> > > On what migrations? A board that has a boot command is not some legacy
> > > non-migrated case. That's a valid regular use case.
> >
> > I'm referring to a board that uses distro scripts.
>
> OK. Just FYI, "distro scripts" weren't a thing outside of ARM (and maybe
> RISC-V, and just turris_1x_sdcard on PPC?).

OK. If those boards don't boot distros then I suppose it doesn't
matter what they do. It would still be nice to get rid of/reduce the
scripts, but we shouldn't require it.

So where are we with bootstd migration?

Regards,
Simon