From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] Support skipping automatic BM enumeration To: Laszlo Ersek ,devel@edk2.groups.io From: "Jeff Brasen" X-Originating-Location: US (216.228.112.21) X-Originating-Platform: Linux Chrome 72 User-Agent: GROUPS.IO Web Poster MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 15:19:40 -0800 References: <72ce1d71-2a65-a6c0-1dd8-7628429c5a3c@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <72ce1d71-2a65-a6c0-1dd8-7628429c5a3c@redhat.com> Message-ID: <27337.1572995980617823578@groups.io> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="hMoiLEFYUdH1DaOqOtQW" --hMoiLEFYUdH1DaOqOtQW Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Wouldn't having a variable that we create and delete on every boot put unne= cessary stress on the SPI-NOR that the variable store lives on? What about the alternative approach where we allow the platform code to mo= dify the attributes of the auto created variable to disable it with hidden/= !active but still match for detection purposes so that it doesn't delete an= d recreate the modified variable each boot? That way all the logic on what = to disable can still be in the platform code and all the existing logic in = the boot manager can stay basically the same? Thanks, Jeff --hMoiLEFYUdH1DaOqOtQW Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Wouldn't having a variable that we create and delete on every boot put u= nnecessary stress on the SPI-NOR that the variable store lives on?
What about the alternative approach where we allow the platform code to = modify the attributes of the auto created variable to disable it with hidde= n/!active but still match for detection purposes so that it doesn't delete = and recreate the modified variable each boot? That way all the logic on wha= t to disable can still be in the platform code and all the existing logic i= n the boot manager can stay basically the same?

Thanks,

Jeff
 

--hMoiLEFYUdH1DaOqOtQW--