[meta-intel] [yocto] [meta-inte][rmc][PATCH v2 1/1] rmc: add support for alternative EFI bootloaders

[Cal Sullivan]

On 12/13/2016 04:50 PM, Todor Minchev wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 16:22 -0800, Jianxun Zhang wrote:
>>> On Dec 13, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Todor Minchev <todor.minchev at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> RMC was previously configured to work only with the systemd-boot EFI
>>> bootloader. With this commit we can specify alternative bootloaders by
>>> setting the RMC_BOOTLOADER variable in local.conf. If RMC_BOOTLOADER is
>>> not set systemd-boot will be used by default.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Todor Minchev <todor.minchev at linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> Remove references to grub-efi and gummiboot from V1.
>>>
>>> classes/{rmc-systemd-boot.bbclass => rmc-boot.bbclass} |  5 +++--
>>> conf/machine/include/meta-intel.inc                    |  2 +-
>>> documentation/rmc/README                               | 16 +++++++++++++---
>>> 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>> rename classes/{rmc-systemd-boot.bbclass => rmc-boot.bbclass} (73%)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/classes/rmc-systemd-boot.bbclass b/classes/rmc-boot.bbclass
>>> similarity index 73%
>>> rename from classes/rmc-systemd-boot.bbclass
>>> rename to classes/rmc-boot.bbclass
>>> index ad2cf10..a1f2093 100644
>>> --- a/classes/rmc-systemd-boot.bbclass
>>> +++ b/classes/rmc-boot.bbclass
>>> @@ -1,9 +1,10 @@
>>> -# rmc-systemd-boot bbclass
>>> +# rmc-boot bbclass
>>> # Deploy central RMC database file to ESP
>>>
>>> IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " rmc"
>>> +RMC_BOOTLOADER ?= "systemd-boot”
>> Maybe this is what we could have now without bothering OE. It is better than the corrent code at the cost of another variable to user. I hope in the future we could get rid of  the dependency to EFI_PROVIDER (e.g. bz10084).
>>
>> Also refer to my comment for the document change at the below.
>>> -inherit systemd-boot
>>> +inherit ${RMC_BOOTLOADER}
>>>
>>> do_bootimg[depends] += "${MLPREFIX}rmc-db:do_deploy"
>>>
>>> diff --git a/conf/machine/include/meta-intel.inc b/conf/machine/include/meta-intel.inc
>>> index c7555ce..fd0a792 100644
>>> --- a/conf/machine/include/meta-intel.inc
>>> +++ b/conf/machine/include/meta-intel.inc
>>> @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ MACHINE_ESSENTIAL_EXTRA_RDEPENDS_append = "${@bb.utils.contains('MACHINE_FEATURE
>>> # merge the microcode data in the final initrd image.
>>> INITRD_LIVE_prepend = "${@bb.utils.contains('MACHINE_FEATURES', 'intel-ucode', '${DEPLOY_DIR_IMAGE}/microcode.cpio ', '', d)}"
>>>
>>> -EFI_PROVIDER ?= "rmc-systemd-boot"
>>> +EFI_PROVIDER ?= "rmc-boot"
>>>
>>> # Add general MACHINEOVERRIDE for meta-intel
>>> MACHINEOVERRIDES =. "intel-x86-common:"
>>> diff --git a/documentation/rmc/README b/documentation/rmc/README
>>> index 2427ffd..dbee6b6 100644
>>> --- a/documentation/rmc/README
>>> +++ b/documentation/rmc/README
>>> @@ -165,14 +165,24 @@ steps still can override results from this hook for boot entries and KBOOTPARAM.
>>>
>>> Enable RMC Feature
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -To Enable RMC feature in build, add the below lines in a conf file:
>>> +To enable the RMC feature please add the following variables to your local.conf.
>>> +
>>> DISTRO_FEATURES_append = " rmc"
>>> -EFI_PROVIDER = "rmc-systemd-boot"
>>> +EFI_PROVIDER = "rmc-boot"
>>> +
>>> +The default EFI bootloader used with RMC is systemd-boot. To change the default
>>> +bootloader please overwrite the RMC_BOOTLOADER variable in your local.conf
>>>
>>> Note:
>>> Image could be still bootable if you only have either of two lines, but RMC
>>> feature won't be fully functional.
>>>
>>> +To install only the RMC client with the systemd-boot bootloader without
>>> +including a default RMC database file, add the following lines to your
>>> +local.conf:
>>> +
>>> +EFI_PROVIDER = "systemd-boot"
>>> +IMAGE_INSTALL_append = " rmc”
>> I think this use case could confuse for user without much benefit. And actually they still can set EFI_PROVIDER to any available efi bootloaders to get this effect as long as it is not “rmc-boot”, right?
>> Maybe we should just say “you won’t get rmc database deployed if you set EFI_PROVIDER to any values not rmc-boot."
> Yes, this can be another way to phrase this.
Is there going to be a v3 or is it sufficient as-is?

Thanks,
Cal
>
>>> Examples
>>> @@ -190,7 +200,7 @@ EXAMPLE 1: Support a new board type:
>>> (1) enable the feature and do a build to get a live-boot image by adding these
>>>      lines in conf/local.conf:
>>>      DISTRO_FEATURES_append = " rmc"
>>> -    EFI_PROVIDER = "rmc-systemd-boot"
>>> +    EFI_PROVIDER = "rmc-boot"
>>>
>>> (2) flash the image to a USB stick and boot it on your board
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> 2.11.0
>>>
>