On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 10:45:31AM +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote: > On 3/19/20 10:33 AM, Ilias Apalodimas wrote: > > Akashi-san, > > > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 03:56:53PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > Regarding capsule update, > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 09:45:28PM +0100, Francois Ozog wrote: > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > Directory \EFI\UpdateCapsule - A file placed on this directory on the > > > > > boot device is considered a capsule. This is much easier to implement. > > > > > > > > > > Essentially you could also use BootNext to run any binary for > > > > > updating. > > > > > > > > > > I suggest to go for the directory method of capsule updating. > > > > > > > > > That’s the goal for the moment. Yet a whole bunch new to be clarified. > > > > We > > > > are working on a document to be commented. > > > > > > As some of you may know, I'm going to submit a RFC patch series for UEFI > > > capsule support on U-Boot in a week or so (maybe). With this patch, > > > we will support "Capsule-on-Disk" only (but without authentication > > > implemented). > > > > > > One of my concerns here is about "variable update via a capsule" as > > > an alternative of "SetVariable at runtime," where values to be set > > > for variables will be exported as a capsule file and all the updates > > > will take place after rebooting. This is very useful on systems > > > where SetVariable is not available at runtime for some reasons. > > > Some idea has been proposed by Peter[1], but the discussion has been > > > stalled for a long time. > > > > > > [1] > > > https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/boot-architecture/2018-October/000883.html > > > > So the way i understand it we got two paths we can follow: > > 1. Use a configuration table for those variables > > 2. Shadow the variables on a kernel accessible memory in order to have > > access to > > them > > It is unclear to me why it would be advantageous to follow any of these > ideas compared to using GetVariable and SetVariable and letting the > firmware runtime manage the memory area.
This describes some of the reasoning behind the idea. https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/boot-architecture/2018-September/000841.html The short version is that we should be able to provide GetVariable() even if SetVariable() is not implemented. Regards /Ilias _______________________________________________ boot-architecture mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture
