Hello all, Same question again. Could we please make some progress on this?
Full thread here: https://openfw.io/edk2-devel/20231031173700.647004-1-ngo...@fedoraproject.org/ If nobody objects, I will assume that the change is acceptable and merge it by the end of the week. Thanks, Ard. On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 at 09:11, Ard Biesheuvel <a...@kernel.org> wrote: > > (cc Mike, Leif) > > On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 at 08:40, Ard Biesheuvel <a...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > (cc Liming) > > > > On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 at 05:48, Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 6:36 PM Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 2, 2023 at 6:35 AM Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 10/31/23 23:27, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > > > > > On 10/31/23 12:37, Neal Gompa via groups.io wrote: > > > > > >> From: Neal Gompa <ngo...@fedoraproject.org> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Currently, the ReadyToBoot event is only signaled when a formal > > > > > >> Boot > > > > > >> Manager option is executed (in BmBoot.c -> EfiBootManagerBoot ()). > > > > > >> > > > > > >> However, the introduction of Platform Recovery in UEFI 2.5 makes it > > > > > >> necessary to signal ReadyToBoot when a Platform Recovery boot > > > > > >> loader > > > > > >> runs because otherwise it may lead to the execution of a boot > > > > > >> loader > > > > > >> that has similar requirements to a regular one that is not launched > > > > > >> as a Boot Manager option. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> This is especially critical to ensuring that the graphical console > > > > > >> is actually usable during platform recovery, as some platforms do > > > > > >> rely on the ConsolePrefDxe driver, which only performs console > > > > > >> initialization after ReadyToBoot is triggered. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> This patch fixes that behavior by calling > > > > > >> EfiSignalEventReadyToBoot () > > > > > >> in EfiBootManagerProcessLoadOption () when invoking platform > > > > > >> recovery, > > > > > >> which is the function that sets up the platform recovery boot > > > > > >> process. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> The expected behavior has been clarified in the UEFI 2.10 > > > > > >> specification > > > > > >> to explicitly indicate this behavior is required for correct > > > > > >> operation. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> This is a rebased version of the patch originally written by Pete > > > > > >> Batard. > > > > > > > > > > > > Took me a bit to swap in that whole conversation again, and recheck > > > > > > the > > > > > > spec's and code paths, but this all looks fine to me and should > > > > > > allow > > > > > > the PFTF build to drop the similar patch from Pete that has been > > > > > > carried > > > > > > downstream for the past couple years. > > > > > > > > > > > > As for testing the previous patch has been in the field for a couple > > > > > > years now and i'm not aware of it causing any issues. The additional > > > > > > restriction of limiting it to platform recovery logically makes > > > > > > sense, > > > > > > and as far as I can see shouldn't cause any problems. > > > > > > > > > > > > So, > > > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.lin...@arm.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As a PS: I also went to check the ready to boot behavior for > > > > > > OsRecovery > > > > > > and realized that apparently none of that support was ever merged? > > > > > > > > > > What else is there, outside of this patch, in need of upstreaming? > > > > > > > > > > > That seems a bit of an oversight since its been in the spec for a > > > > > > few years now. > > > > > > > > > > "ready-to-boot for OsRecovery" is new in UEFI 2.10 (according to the > > > > > commit message), which is quite recent ("Aug 29, 2022"). > > > > > > > > > > I couldn't find the Mantis ticket in the Revision History (for 2.10) > > > > > though. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there anything else holding up committing this patch? Jeremy and > > > > you reviewed it earlier in the month... > > > > > > > > > > Friendly ping again? It's been a month now... > > > > > > > Apologies for the delay - Liming, can we progress with this? > > Can we please make some progress with this? This has been in limbo for > far too long. > > Thanks, -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#112653): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/112653 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102302654/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
