On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 04:11:14AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 03.12.18 08:02, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 12:46:20AM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 05.11.18 10:06, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
"devices" command prints all the uefi variables on the system. => efishell devices Device Name ============================================ /VenHw(e61d73b9-a384-4acc-aeab-82e828f3628b) /VenHw(e61d73b9-a384-4acc-aeab-82e828f3628b)/SD(0)/SD(0) /VenHw(e61d73b9-a384-4acc-aeab-82e828f3628b)/SD(0)/SD(0)/\ HD(2,MBR,0x086246ba,0x40800,0x3f800) /VenHw(e61d73b9-a384-4acc-aeab-82e828f3628b)/SD(0)/SD(0)/\ HD(1,MBR,0x086246ba,0x800,0x40000)
Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro takahiro.akashi@linaro.org
cmd/efishell.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 87 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/cmd/efishell.c b/cmd/efishell.c index abc8216c7bd6..f4fa3fdf28a7 100644 --- a/cmd/efishell.c +++ b/cmd/efishell.c @@ -21,6 +21,8 @@
DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
+static const struct efi_boot_services *bs;
Why do you need a local copy of this?
Good point. It's because I followed the way boot manager does :)
I think that it would be good to do so since either boot manager or efishell should ultimately be an independent efi application in its nature.
What do you think?
Back to your original comment: Why do you need a local copy of this?
Do you think we should use systab.boottime,runtime instead?
As mentioned in the other email thread, I think that we should definitely evaluate to add the edk2 shell as built-in option.
Do you expect that I will add a new config, say, CONFIG_EFI_SHELL_PATH?
-Takahiro Akashi
That way for the "full-fledged" shell experience, your built-in code is not needed. But I still believe it would be useful for quick and built-in debugging.
Alex