From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.24352.1596981088572388119 for ; Sun, 09 Aug 2020 06:51:29 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@intel.onmicrosoft.com header.s=selector2-intel-onmicrosoft-com header.b=WNbMQBv5; spf=pass (domain: intel.com, ip: 134.134.136.20, mailfrom: zhichao.gao@intel.com) IronPort-SDR: S2hojPqdPcsdiQhkn6HhGKdbhKBOpPSTSNy2XAwNRl2ktvD1bj26ViVdln0quy9/aM0BRcuVCg UgYVzJYuSh/w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9707"; a="141286532" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,453,1589266800"; d="scan'208,217";a="141286532" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2020 06:51:27 -0700 IronPort-SDR: GdGvXdtDPxG9Tw+XlIf3ypqKAyvCRkxrxpPVttRAWlVjNMyUYrGpdWIO1JdO4js1hxQwy3yG35 C3GeJECxf4Ww== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,453,1589266800"; d="scan'208,217";a="397999443" Received: from fmsmsx603.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.126.83]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Aug 2020 06:51:26 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx607.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.126.87) by fmsmsx603.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.126.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1713.5; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 06:51:25 -0700 Received: from FMSEDG002.ED.cps.intel.com (10.1.192.134) by fmsmsx607.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.126.87) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 06:51:25 -0700 Received: from NAM12-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (104.47.59.172) by edgegateway.intel.com (192.55.55.69) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 06:51:24 -0700 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=P7HRCRp7KE/idYlwQ4QTh64WI8038090rsWkh2/6qE4uWWvWqJd5d6QT65apLUD3iGuFVH7s4wlQyeogu3amljETSVAqNd/Phz+JGl+6CRa46RAZAw8J5Y9tvVarAvyE8w4/UBkzRvoaQN3FB5hP/0G7KPibEoEE9qqUVYZ/CP4m5LhaiC/ViM8yv8LxK0XIPa0gLq2ky1j3N2gwhgzV5gzCqJWUAIdgELUZ66XVpEHzWROl0Xb4Qub9VITXTec9pbLtFAvyvleJZowzVYyZBP3/nf6dUBtwEVtz4gWSsLKaI4W9eReyQutxq6DCvk3YJrcbhTsdfsRr/kvSXDv/Fw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=YSj5FLj0iUNP6M5N9eTgl38vXklIqZ9IgZt0Rwm4AGY=; b=Rd5D05gFp9ogd+nmMmK+R/gcduD5jalxeO01o0gvbJTphDwccAGlKi9A7a/BIJS5Ikr+4G14QbL+pQfh9rUttUsPDwpwRkPBewuShyg3DFJmDpBkdHKd5eGIiRToM8Gn+WV2WbdRK93VgXRcNj+GMImaRH0zpHIZjICl4qE/Z/9r+2dyrJvyvfyJVaNpa03FK3SmKr/uGm/DotAh8OdjI1Rf4LHC46pf2OclwK6yyuz+JyrscjG/6T6UryFA4PyY8X2cGUpeMYGD8a0upgK+FJVDQjk3wR43oIyNribV2Bmn5MMQ++NQcn4vsH+ZxoklM6JKFs/ZzRDF/Xr7kkEkwQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=intel.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-intel-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=YSj5FLj0iUNP6M5N9eTgl38vXklIqZ9IgZt0Rwm4AGY=; b=WNbMQBv59MqdcMb0ZcSS6uUHuT01iFAGjqBASJjr2C9c4SUM4jU8Jlri6IlXsD6Z+lFUGOMZkiZ/ov82w9Oq8T5VtOcVK78fH+0jU0jeEbFx/GW3SbVJwsQ3VGEGnFDhMIlNOPGxuoapm5mN0x0P9ajhQoa0D3g7C2RRz5o/L1c= Received: from DM6PR11MB4425.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:1d9::31) by DM6PR11MB3052.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:69::29) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3261.18; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 13:51:12 +0000 Received: from DM6PR11MB4425.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ad34:e1fc:2e7b:d124]) by DM6PR11MB4425.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::ad34:e1fc:2e7b:d124%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3261.022; Sun, 9 Aug 2020 13:51:12 +0000 From: "Gao, Zhichao" To: "devel@edk2.groups.io" CC: "Ni, Ray" , Laszlo Ersek , Gary Lin , "Wu, Hao A" Subject: Partition issue with Linux Distribution iso image Thread-Topic: Partition issue with Linux Distribution iso image Thread-Index: AdZuUddgbTLj0RjxQp+GeiWdUyN0eA== Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2020 13:51:12 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-reaction: no-action dlp-version: 11.5.1.3 authentication-results: edk2.groups.io; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;edk2.groups.io; dmarc=none action=none header.from=intel.com; x-originating-ip: [192.198.147.194] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 9047f905-9926-42c1-ae8c-08d83c6b472b x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR11MB3052: x-ld-processed: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d,ExtAddr x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:6108; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: HDPGmC0fy0PDYoZJe8KRZWHYxSgkyrBgbzs9G5QvX+HWQo4yWJXUoAA6x00vJODXzTDgLNtzhr3TPmcILJBTF5StxWVUcYhHrQ+rOaJ8lxoOmcbx2ubpYfM5mfKkkV3zmwPUscBg9ywsQDcgu7C3CBKiG/r4YwVZElfdcNF8vc9Jlik0oY0eXklXFV9qanxD3quhy+9j2xEbQDp7ElboRAEm4wryQka8ARBu6iXzYRMSgO5J6xEVao+fGpDPQ/50AAg+G2GFg5HjyKuyk67OvPkqCKPOWixV2SEDIRmU2cHpd60vfRyEpuq/EdEk4J7SjNvmJiCk3vq1DBHRJD3Ul46JBARI7fM1SqbrJ35cVK+z+UPmmDhTnZdgVv6ZgJP6dMYrZ7dbhdNaJTjbCCbmdw== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:DM6PR11MB4425.namprd11.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFTY:;SFS:(4636009)(396003)(366004)(376002)(346002)(39860400002)(136003)(6506007)(71200400001)(54906003)(33656002)(8936002)(4326008)(107886003)(8676002)(9326002)(186003)(66946007)(64756008)(66556008)(166002)(478600001)(76116006)(66476007)(66446008)(26005)(9686003)(6916009)(55016002)(86362001)(966005)(2906002)(316002)(52536014)(5660300002)(7696005);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: b+THHjglMxF1NdP9OdtxO1VoHqO5LO3eSU0xDI1DMRsrBhOFf7Bzu6ZjgPwFgXoPnjMiNuFNnQqLWoJcHLNENUmY59QXsw9PSXEkq0S9mDIgFNgefwhfNS/88EKuPNhmpSaQ2Bv0pr6bFp8Oog4sYe7QpDHCwU42AbJ4pJSwmnVcHpn4ruvEP31QqJLSQFVn5pfSPZa57jY3d1PZIraAIbVsvq22cn+sbvI/OT57J06MXtSkMsY/LD4MVA40/ybMJypXD3A8ANr+6Cu+QV2YZ1x0/UFYYtYmHmHdHEo+Xyy0uPpm4OTIFDDE4w+3sB+V3ITv8RdR5vs1n4mf0s+eHvsMwS/tdWrAYM5u14JCVzlnP88WKTbykdFSGlOiiG/iQaVllQosJ1Of7yOx16r17cJRhe+BFo3JvYnDUajK6Jc3PaTM+c4uI+qfNTIICrpqHwOgK6FylKV7jdzaY2gz9ekxVLxwNziSRgjc1WkBBL55y5wcG6GfYR97vHQKzCUFP61w1giFx0OL8gp+KIaNIJHOU0l6saPAbxfbTYQwRXAFnkC0itzU/vOscDQuF1MW64XpCxD/t8nyPVc/Zx1/0yixkgWI/T8rtEn4RbQhJ/1O13VNiaHKhITYAsYY7iGZE5jiW6UIY99CxuRsNyVK5w== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DM6PR11MB4425.namprd11.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9047f905-9926-42c1-ae8c-08d83c6b472b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Aug 2020 13:51:12.5078 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 3kRy0hZvwnSdo+drjLwjOVrxsgmqiA0X/buLDQowbsqv52OPhbazF6gVLOIGWxnn7Qd5BydnmnCazaVwZXZ7gw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR11MB3052 Return-Path: zhichao.gao@intel.com X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_DM6PR11MB442559450E19514476D29C95F6470DM6PR11MB4425namp_" --_000_DM6PR11MB442559450E19514476D29C95F6470DM6PR11MB4425namp_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi All, Some Linux Distribution ISO image would contain both Eltorito(iso 9660) vol= ume info and MBR table at the same time. That would cause the partition che= ck pass the MBR and ignore the UDF (Eltorito compatible) check. There is a bug in the partition child handler: https://bugzilla.tianocore.o= rg/show_bug.cgi?id=3D2843. It would make the MBR transfer the wrong device = size. That cause the FAT driver fail to install the FAT protocol onto= the device. But when I solve the issue, the EFI partition can be found as MBR FAT devic= e. That would cause another issue. Boot from the MBR FAT from ISO image is = different with boot from CD FAT. Here is the difference: Boot from MBR FAT: go to the grub terminal window. Boot from CD FAT: go to the installation window. I don't know why the same grub image act different behaviors. But I believe= "Boot from CD FAT" is the right behavior. That means the ISO 9660 should n= ot be treated as MBR device in UEFI BIOS. So I would like to add a logic: the ISO image that contain both ISO 9660 vo= lume info and MBR partition, the partition driver would skip the MBR check = and continue to do the ISO 9660 check. There is a easy way to do this, i.e.= put the UDF (ISO 9660 compatible) before the MBR check. It means the parti= tion routine child handle would have a priority and the UDF (ISO 9660) has = high priority than the MBR. That would solve all the Linux Distribution ISO= image issue in my thought. I want to get some suggestion from the community before I sent the patch. Thanks, Zhichao --_000_DM6PR11MB442559450E19514476D29C95F6470DM6PR11MB4425namp_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi All,

 

Some Linux Distribution ISO image would contain both= Eltorito(iso 9660) volume info and MBR table at the same time. That would = cause the partition check pass the MBR and ignore the UDF (Eltorito compati= ble) check.

There is a bug in the partition child handler: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D2843. It would make th= e MBR transfer the wrong device size. That cause the FAT driver fail to ins= tall the FAT       protocol onto the device.<= o:p>

But when I solve the issue, the EFI partition can be= found as MBR FAT device. That would cause another issue. Boot from the MBR= FAT from ISO image is different with boot from CD FAT.

Here is the difference:

Boot from MBR FAT: go to the grub terminal window.

Boot from CD FAT: go to the installation window.

I don’t know why the same grub image act diffe= rent behaviors. But I believe “Boot from CD FAT” is the right b= ehavior. That means the ISO 9660 should not be treated as MBR device in UEF= I BIOS.

 

So I would like to add a logic: the ISO image that c= ontain both ISO 9660 volume info and MBR partition, the partition driver wo= uld skip the MBR check and continue to do the ISO 9660 check. There is a ea= sy way to do this, i.e. put the UDF (ISO 9660 compatible) before the MBR check. It means the partition routine= child handle would have a priority and the UDF (ISO 9660) has high priorit= y than the MBR. That would solve all the Linux Distribution ISO image issue= in my thought.

 

I want to get some suggestion from the community bef= ore I sent the patch.

 

Thanks,

Zhichao

--_000_DM6PR11MB442559450E19514476D29C95F6470DM6PR11MB4425namp_--