On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 11:39:49AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 4:29 PM Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 at 07:37, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 04:28:13PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
Since efi_device_path.c calls eth_get_dev() and assumes that Ethernet is available, add it as an explicit dependency.
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
(no changes since v2)
Changes in v2:
- Add new patch to update EFI_LOADER to depend on DM_ETH
lib/efi_loader/Kconfig | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig index 13cad6342c36..fca4b3eef270 100644 --- a/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig +++ b/lib/efi_loader/Kconfig @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ config EFI_LOADER # We need EFI_STUB_32BIT to be set on x86_32 with EFI_STUB depends on !EFI_STUB || !X86 || X86_64 || EFI_STUB_32BIT depends on BLK
depends on DM_ETH depends on !EFI_APP default y if !ARM || SYS_CPU = armv7 || SYS_CPU = armv8 select CHARSETI don't think this is needed. After reconfiguring qemu_arm64 to be able to disable networking entirely, we still are able to build with EFI_LOADER enabled, and no warning / link errors.
Fair enough.
As of this patch the following errors are generated with -a ~CMDLINE :
+lib/efi_loader/efi_device_path.c:985:(.text+0xca4): undefined reference to `eth_get_dev' +/bin/ld: lib/efi_loader/efi_device_path.c:987:(.text+0xca9): undefined reference to `eth_get_dev' +/bin/ld: lib/efi_loader/efi_device_path.c:993:(.text+0xcc9): undefined reference to `eth_get_dev' +/bin/ld: lib/efi_loader/efi_device_path.o: in function `efi_dp_from_name': +lib/efi_loader/efi_device_path.c:1095:(.text+0xe00): undefined reference to `efi_get_image_parameters'
which is why I added this patch. A later patch disables networking entirely with ~CMDLINE so that is why this problem goes away.
This series was basically built up by disabling CMDLINE and then fixing the errors one by one. I didn't go back and check whether (at the end) all the patches were needed.
Was this just tested on sandbox? How do we know it's not going to regress a vast amount of actual devices?
It both shouldn't (DM_ETH is required), and this patch isn't moving forward either.