From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] GSoC 2021 (MinPlatform, Ext2, ACPICA, etc) To: Nate DeSimone ,devel@edk2.groups.io From: "Pedro Falcato" X-Originating-Location: Seixal, District of Setúbal, PT (85.241.253.151) X-Originating-Platform: Windows Chrome 89 User-Agent: GROUPS.IO Web Poster MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 07:16:50 -0700 References: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <15506.1616509010029055239@groups.io> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="OUZM3cpzPQwdlomkwrAt" --OUZM3cpzPQwdlomkwrAt Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Nate! Sorry for taking so long to get back to you, I've been a bit busy and I'm = not too used to so many emails in my inbox :) So, if I'm getting this right, essentially what is proposed in the MinPlat= form board ports is to refactor the existing board code into an OpenBoardPk= g that uses MinPlatform to reuse more generic code? I was thinking about ge= tting a Raspberry Pi and doing the MinPlatform port for that, although hone= stly I'm not too inclined for that option anymore. Honestly, I'm looking more towards the ext2/4 drivers now. I've been pokin= g a little at the build system and how the driver model is supposed to work= and I think I more or less got the idea. Here's the link to my ext2 test r= epo, if you're curious: https://github.com/heatd/edk2-ext. Note that it doe= sn't quite do anything right now, it's missing all sorts of features and te= sting and what's there is mostly driver model and build system boilerplate = that was pieced together by looking at the UEFI spec and the FatPkg code, p= lus some of my own ext2 headers. With regards to ext4, yes, it sounds like the better option at the moment,= although I'm not terribly familiar with it. I do have some questions thoug= h: * What are the standards for filesystem driver performance? Is a page/disk= cache a necessity for the driver? I would assume the FS driver has some su= bstancial footprint in the overall boot time. * Is the read-only behaviour still the target? Thanks, Pedro Falcato --OUZM3cpzPQwdlomkwrAt Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Nate!

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you, I've been = a bit busy and I'm not too used to so many emails in my inbox :)

So, if I'm getting this right, essentially what is proposed in the MinPlat= form board ports is to refactor the existing board code into an OpenBoardPk= g that uses MinPlatform to reuse more generic code? I was thinking about ge= tting a Raspberry Pi and doing the MinPlatform port for that, although hone= stly I'm not too inclined for that option anymore.

Honestly, I'm= looking more towards the ext2/4 drivers now. I've been poking a little at = the build system and how the driver model is supposed to work and I think I= more or less got the idea. Here's the link to my ext2 test repo, if you're= curious: https://github.com/heatd/edk2-ext. Note that it doesn't= quite do anything right now, it's missing all sorts of features and testin= g and what's there is mostly driver model and build system boilerplate that= was pieced together by looking at the UEFI spec and the FatPkg code, plus = some of my own ext2 headers.

With regards to ext4, yes, it sound= s like the better option at the moment, although I'm not terribly familiar = with it. I do have some questions though:

  1. What are the standards for filesystem driver performance? Is a page/di= sk cache a necessity for the driver? I would assume the FS driver has some = substancial footprint in the overall boot time.
  2. Is the read-only behaviour still the target?
Thanks,
Pedro Falcato --OUZM3cpzPQwdlomkwrAt--