On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 05:48:30PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 09:58:53AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
Am 26. Oktober 2023 07:30:50 MESZ schrieb AKASHI Takahiro takahiro.akashi@linaro.org:
Now it is clear that the feature actually depends on efi interfaces, not "bootefi" command. efi_set_bootdev() will automatically be nullified if necessary efi component is disabled.
Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro takahiro.akashi@linaro.org
fs/fs.c | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/fs.c b/fs/fs.c index 4cb4310c9cc2..70cdb594c4c8 100644 --- a/fs/fs.c +++ b/fs/fs.c @@ -791,10 +791,9 @@ int do_load(struct cmd_tbl *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char *const argv[], return 1; }
- if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CMD_BOOTEFI))
efi_set_bootdev(argv[1], (argc > 2) ? argv[2] : "",(argc > 4) ? argv[4] : "", map_sysmem(addr, 0),len_read);
- efi_set_bootdev(argv[1], (argc > 2) ? argv[2] : "",
This function should not exist for CONFIG_EFI_LOADER=n. There are other places where the function is invoked. Please, review all of them.
Please go through the whole patch set, especially patch#8 "efi_loader: split unrelated code from efi_bootmgr.c".
efi_[set|clear]_bootdev() will be nullified if not necessary.
In this case I think what we have here today is more readable / clearer. We don't need empty functions as we can either do like this section of the code does today or the linker will discard things correctly as it's a case of funcB() calls funcA() and nothing calls funcB() so it will be discarded. I don't know without digging through the series more what the correct IS_ENABLED() guard should be here (and then also in patch #10).