[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 05/18] efi: split efi_enabled to efi_platform and efi_loader
On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 02:04:22PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 27.03.15 at 14:53, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 27/03/15 13:43, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>> On 27.03.15 at 14:32, <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 04:17:35PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>>>>>> On 30.01.15 at 18:54, <daniel.kiper@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> We need more fine grained knowledge about EFI environment and check > >>>>> for EFI platform and EFI loader separately to properly support > >>>>> multiboot2 protocol. > >>>> ... because of ... (i.e. I can't see from the description what the > >>>> separation is good for). Looking at the comments you placed > >>>> aside the variables doesn't help me either. > >>>> > >>>>> In general Xen loaded by this protocol uses > >>>>> memory mappings and loaded modules in simliar way to Xen loaded > >>>>> by multiboot (v1) protocol. Hence, split efi_enabled to efi_platform > >>>>> and efi_loader. > >>>> And if I'm guessing things right, then introducing efi_loader but > >>>> leaving efi_enabled alone (only converting where needed) would > >>> efi_enabled is not fortunate name for new usage. Currently it means > >>> that Xen binary have or does not have EFI support build in. However, > >>> if we build in multiboot2 protocol into xen.gz then it means that > >>> it can ran on legacy BIOS or EFI platform. So, I think that we > >>> should rename efi_enabled to efi_platform because it will mean > >>> that Xen runs on EFI platform or not. > >> I disagree here. > >> > >>> efi_loader is used to differentiate between EFI native loader > >>> and multiboot2 protocol. > >> And I agree here. > > > > I suppose "built with efi support" is known because of CONFIG_EFI or > > not, and doesn't need a variable. > > > > However, "booted legacy" vs "booted EFI" does need distinguishing at > > runtime, as either is possible. > > Right, but that's what efi_enabled is supposed to express after > the change; there's no need to express "built with EFI support". > It just so happens that right now, without all these changes, > built-with-EFI-support == runs-on-EFI. Then how about 'efi_booted' as the variable name. -- Len Sorensen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |