[PATCH] EFI Loader: Correct dependencies for EFI_HTTP_BOOT

[Peter Robinson]

On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 at 13:51, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 08:42:39AM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
> > Am 17. März 2026 08:03:47 MEZ schrieb Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org>:
> > >Hi Tom,
> > >
> > >On Tue, 17 Mar 2026 at 03:24, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> As exposed by "make randconfig", we have an issue with the dependencies
> > >> for EFI_HTTP_BOOT. As this is implemeneted by running commands (as seen
> > >> by what it selects) it must depend on CMDLINE as well.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com>
> > >
> > >In theory, you can configure UEFI with a set of prebuilt boot options.
> > >If one of them is http(s) the device will boot even if CMDLINE is not
> > >selected. I am not against this patch, but we will remove the
> > >possibility to build a firmware without cmdline that just boots to
> > >whatever is was preconfigured
> > >
> > >Cheers
> > >/Ilias
> > >> ---
> > >> Cc: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk at gmx.de>
> > >> Cc: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas at linaro.org>
> > >> ---
> > >>  lib/efi_loader/Kconfig | 1 +
> > >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig
> > >> index b5f81e0ff530..a9b2f813e1d5 100644
> > >> --- a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig
> > >> +++ b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig
> > >> @@ -600,6 +600,7 @@ config EFI_BOOTMGR
> > >>  config EFI_HTTP_BOOT
> > >>         bool "EFI HTTP Boot support"
> > >>         depends on NET || NET_LWIP
> > >> +       depends on CMDLINE
> > >>         select CMD_NET
> > >>         select CMD_DHCP
> > >>         select CMD_DNS
> >
> > Having to select commands here to get network is what needs to change. The network commands and EFI_HTTP_BOOT both should depend on configuration symbols for the protocol implementations.
>
> Yes. And this is about fixing missing dependencies, today.
>
> > @Tom: Do we have a target release when to finish the move to the LWIP stack?
>
> We do not. I'm not yet sure if all the various use cases of the legacy
> stack are fully supported now (I don't recall off-hand the NFS series
> state right now for example).

I did see NFS patches go through the list.

I think there's also likely some legacy usecases where non parity is
likely fine too.

Peter