Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/EFI: define and use EFI_DIR make variable, defaulting to /usr/lib64/efi

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 24.07.12 at 14:38, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 13:28 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 24.07.12 at 14:04, Matt Wilson <msw@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 03:43:01AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >>> On 24.07.12 at 12:11, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> > On Tue, 2012-07-24 at 10:40 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >> >>> On 24.07.12 at 10:57, Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> >> > On Mon, 2012-07-23 at 11:03 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> >> >> > I noticed that (at least on Debian) grub uses 
>> >> >> >> > /usr/lib/grub/<arch>-efi
>> >> >> >> > and elilo uses /usr/lib/elilo.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> It's definitely /usr/lib64/efi/elilo.efi on SLE11, so I'm afraid 
>> >> >> >> this
>> >> >> >> really ins't well standardized (and hence an EFI_DIR override is
>> >> >> >> warranted, yet settling on a proper default may be problematic).
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> > Does that mean we should be using /usr/lib/xen/efi rather than 
>> >> >> > /usr/lib/efi?
>> >> >> >> > 
>> >> >> >> > What is the policy for EFI install location on RPM/LSB based 
>> >> >> >> > systems?
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> Don't know.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> > We already have EFI_MOUNTPOINT under xen/*, I think EFI_DIR 
>> >> >> >> >> > under there
>> >> >> >> >> > (or in config/*) is fine also.
>> >> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> >> That part wasn't controversial (if generally useful), but imo it
>> >> >> >> >> shouldn't expand to an open-coded path (unless put into
>> >> >> >> >> config/x86_64.mk).
>> >> >> >> > 
>> >> >> >> > I could live with that. Unlike LIBDIR, where getting it wrong can 
>> >> >> >> > mean
>> >> >> >> > things don't work, getting EFI_DIR wrong is merely ugly.
>> >> >> >> 
>> >> >> >> Not exactly - it might still mean that boot loader installation (and
>> >> >> >> update) doesn't work anymore. But getting things consistent
>> >> >> >> would be a one-time per-distro task, so ought to be manageable.
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > So is the upshot that the original patch is basically OK, subject to
>> >> >> > settling on a reasonable default for EFI_DIR? With the proviso that
>> >> >> > there's basically no standardisation of this stuff and every distro
>> >> >> > seems to be choosing a different path?
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Yes, that's my understanding too.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> > /usr/lib64/efi seems as good as anything. Suitable alternatives might
>> >> >> > be /usr/{lib,lib64}/xen/efi/...
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Until we know better, I'd prefer to continue to use the location
>> >> >> we used so far (i.e. /usr/lib64/efi).
>> >> > 
>> >> > OK by me.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Are you going to ack / commit this patch?
>> >> 
>> >> Once we see a version matching the outcome of the discussion
>> >> I would, certainly. Adjusting the patch that was sent earlier
>> >> would be something I'd likely get to only later this or next week.
>> > 
>> > The current patch places xen.efi in /usr/lib64/efi/
>> > 
>> > $ find dist -name *efi
>> > dist/install/usr/lib64/efi
>> > dist/install/usr/lib64/efi/xen-4.2.efi
>> > dist/install/usr/lib64/efi/xen-4.efi
>> > dist/install/usr/lib64/efi/xen-4.2-unstable.efi
>> > dist/install/usr/lib64/efi/xen.efi
>> > 
>> > Is there some other change needed?
>> 
>> The placement of the default EFI_DIR definition needs adjustment
>> iirc - if we're going to hard-code an architecture specific directory,
>> that definition ought to live in config/x86_64.mk.
> 
> With an alternative in config/x86_32.mk? 

There's no EFI support on x86-32.

> Or do these belong in StdGNU.mk etc?

No.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel