On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 01:45:49AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
On 7/27/21 12:07 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Jul 02, 2021 at 12:36:18PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
This feature should never have been made available when driver model or devicetree are disabled. Add these as conditions, so that we don't create even more barriers to migration.
Add a note about the substantial size increment associated with this option.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
Changes in v2:
Split out new patch to make EFI_LOADER depend on DM and OF_CONTROL
Note the approximate size of this feature in the help
lib/efi_loader/Kconfig | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig index 6242caceb7f..466abfed300 100644 --- a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig +++ b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ config EFI_LOADER bool "Support running UEFI applications"
- depends on OF_LIBFDT && ( \
- depends on OF_LIBFDT && DM && OF_CONTROL && ( \
Didn't Tom eliminate all boards without CONFIG_DM? Shouldn't we get rid of this symbol?
No, but I did send out a message about that today as we're very close. Much closer than I had expected us to be.
Are there boards using DM and not OF_CONTROL or OF_CONTROL and not DM?
Yes, a few. It's vexpress_aemv8a_semi, warp (fixed by https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20210402180552.1075997-2-pb... so false positive), cm_t335, devkit8000, armadillo-800eva, kzm9g and sniper.
Why are these separate symbols? Isn't this symbol to be eliminated, too?
Simon?
lib/efi_loader/efi_disk.c is the only place where we maintain duplicate code for DM and non-DM. A dependency on CONFIG_BLK (which itself depends on CONFIG_DM) would make more sense to me. But only in a patch eliminating the non-BLK code.
I just know that off-hand, partition + disk + block has some corner case, but maybe that corner case is unintentional in terms of usage today.
ARM && (SYS_CPU = arm1136 || \ SYS_CPU = arm1176 || \ SYS_CPU = armv7 || \@@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ config EFI_LOADER will expose the UEFI API to a loaded application, enabling it to reuse U-Boot's device drivers.
For ARM 32-bit, this adds about 90KB to the size of U-Boot.There is no unit ISO prefix K. Do you mean KiB?
90 KiB may be the value today. Will you update it regularly? Otherwise don't put a number here.
I can't see that the effect on size is truly architecture specific. Why do you refer to 32bit ARM?
Such a comment would better fit into a documentation chapter on downsizing U-Boot.
Yes, we should probably drop that specific note.