On 12/2/18 10:47 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 16.07.18 20:06, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
On 06/14/2018 10:46 PM, Guillaume GARDET wrote:
As used on some distro, such as openSUSE. Signed-off-by: Guillaume GARDET guillaume.gardet@free.fr
Cc: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com
include/config_distro_bootcmd.h | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h index d672e8ebe6..ad4c7a78f1 100644 --- a/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h +++ b/include/config_distro_bootcmd.h @@ -141,7 +141,8 @@ "load ${devtype} ${devnum}:${distro_bootpart} " \ "${fdt_addr_r} ${prefix}${efi_fdtfile}\0" \ \
- "efi_dtb_prefixes=/ /dtb/ /dtb/current/\0" \
- "efi_dtb_prefixes=/ /dtb/ /dtb/current/ " \
"/boot/ /boot/dtb/ /boot/dtb/current/\0" \I prefer programming against standards and not against whatever is out in the wild.
Could you, please, indicate according to which standard you think that the dtb should be found in directory /boot/dtb of the EFI partition.
In openSUSE we have 2 hacks:
Search for the DTB on the second partition always, not the active one
Search for the DTB in additional paths (this patch)
The reason being that we do not want to copy the DTB to the EFI boot partition, but instead just provide it in an easily accessible /boot/dtb directory on the root partition that gets updated by RPM.
Now, I personally think that this is a pretty distro specific hack. I am not sure how much more of a hack it is than searching for a DTB file at all though :).
So I'm personally not terribly opposed to pulling this in upstream. /boot/dtb is as little standardized as /dtb/ or /dtb/current/ is.
Alex
Adding more and more paths slows down the boot process. So this should be avoided.
Isn't boot.scr meant to do the distribution specific stuff?
I think it is sufficient to find the boot.scr file and let it do its job. Ubuntu and Debian are already working like this. Does Suse not have the capability to install a boot.scr?
Best regards
Heinrich