On 12/19/17 14:38, Oliver Pinter wrote: > On Tuesday, December 19, 2017, Warner Losh <imp_at_bsdimp.com> wrote: > >> [snip] >>> Or the following pseudo-code with all the weird special cases removed for >>> clarity >>> >>> load loader.efi from ESP >>> if BootXXXX uefi variable holds a second path, use that for root/kernel >>> otherwise if an override variable holds a kernel/root path, use that >>> otherwise scan for a usable ZFS pool, use that if it exists >>> otherwise use the same partition loader.efi was booted from for >> root/kernel >>> if it's usable >>> otherwise use the first UFS partition on the ESP that's usable. >> use the ACTIVE ufs partition, not the first, I can have more than 1 slice, >> only 1 of them can be set active. Do not use any ufs partitions if they >> are not in active slices, it is possible to have 0 partitions set active. >> >> >> Active is not a GPT concept. UEFI makes it hard to implement since there is >> no good API to get and set the flags FreeBSD's gptboot uses to hack this >> concept in. Active is done via BootOrder UEFI variable. Loader.efi and >> boot.efi completely ignore this today. I have no plans on changing that. > > And what's about the bootme and bootonce flags in gpart? They are > freebsdism? Or they are the equivalent of active in the UEFI standard? > They are a FreeBSD-ism. Because UEFI handles parsing the GPT tables internally, it is not even possible to read them from loader.efi. -NathanReceived on Tue Dec 19 2017 - 22:18:03 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:14 UTC