On Sat, Feb 04, 2023 at 06:21:48PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Tom, Heinrich,
On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 at 07:51, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 03:48:44PM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
On 1/30/23 15:40, Simon Glass wrote:
This and EFI_DEVICE_PATH_TO_TEXT are implicitly used in the source and
This code is not compiled in SPL. So it cannot be used there.
seem useful, so add them.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
lib/efi_loader/Kconfig | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig index 9fe9a2df9ea..0bd42b9e196 100644 --- a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig +++ b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig @@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ config EFI_LOADER
if EFI_LOADER
+config SPL_EFI_LOADER
- def_bool n # Support running UEFI applications (SPL)
- depends on SPL
I cannot see how this could be used:
- The size of the EFI code is too big to fit into SPL on most boards.
OK, so please do a series to correct all CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(EFI_*) to be IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_EFI_*), other than EFI_PARTITIONS which can be in SPL.
This is another case where I think it is actually needed.
Heinrich makes the point that this code cannot be used in SPL. It is precisely because of that that we need an SPL version of the config. Otherwise it will be enabled everywhere. The fact that it currently works is due to CONFIG_IS_ENABLED() not caring whether the Kconfig options it is checking are present or not. That needs to change with split config.
OK, so this belongs in the split config series then. That today CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(FOO) evaluates to false if we never define SPL/TPL/VPL_FOO as a symbol is a feature, not a glitch, of the system. It's used both in cases like you further explained around EFI_LOADER where we do have some additions to core functionality (like printing EFI paths in lib/vsprintf.c) that will never be needed in SPL, but modify code that is included in SPL, so it cannot just use IS_ENABLED or an ifdef as that would be true in SPL, and bloat the code, so we rely on an always false test. It's also been used a time or two for the case of "today no one has SPL_FOO, but in the future they may, and would want this path to be taken". That is rarer, but I know I did that at least once.