Re: HELP: UEFI/ZFS Boot failure: Ignoring Boot000A: Only one DP found

On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 08:43:53 +0300
Toomas Soome <tsoome_at_me.com> wrote:

> > On 27 Aug 2019, at 08:08, Warner Losh <imp_at_bsdimp.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 26, 2019, 5:32 PM Rebecca Cran <rebecca_at_bsdio.com
> > <mailto:rebecca_at_bsdio.com>> wrote:
> >> On 8/26/19 5:22 AM, O. Hartmann wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> the other thing is the weird Lenovo handling of the UEFI vars. The only
> >> way to
> >>> boot the E540 (after(!) disabling _BEARSSL in src.conf and rebuilding
> >>> everything) was to set the loader's name to EFI/BOOT/BOOTx64.efi.
> >> Setting the
> >>> variable to contain EFI/BOOT/loader.efi failed as well as setting
> >>> EFI/FreeBSD/loader.efi.
> >>
> >>
> >> I've been suggesting FreeBSD should install the loader as
> >> \EFI\BOOT\BOOTx64.efi for a while (as long as there's not already a
> >> different vendor's loader there), without much success. Hopefully this
> >> finding can cause us to reconsider.
> >>
> >
> > That's the first machine I've seen where you have to set the name like
> > that... there is a larger story here and we are getting incomplete reports
> > because it doesn't quite make sense yet...
> >
> > But there are enough reasons not to do that by default. For one thing, it
> > messes up rEFInd, or can. Windows doesn't install there. At most we should
> > prompt for older machines.  We shouldn't mortgage our future to cope with a
> > legacy we know will sunset soon...
> >
> > Warner
> >
>
> For me it is still confusing if this is path versus upper-lower capital
> chars.
>
> If that vendor is using suggestion from UEFI Spec 2.7A section 3.5.1.1 (page
> 91), then the file name should also end with .EFI. (and yes, I know, that
> section is talking about removable media).
>
> Therefore the question is, does lenovo accept name like
> EFI/FREEBSD/LOADER.EFI? Or what form is used there for windows paths?

My initial report was a bit confusing due to the fact I used to have a loader
compiled on 12-STABLE with WITH_BEARSSL enabled. I also mixed up loader.efi
from CURRENT (from the recent USB boot drive image). Since the ESP is FAT12 (in
my case), I thought upper- or lowercase isn't relevant here - but it seems to
be. So I used lower case paths and filenames and in one case a mixture.

Since I now know what the problem caused initially, I can check whether the
path and/or filename's upper- or lowercase matters.

I have a strange feeling about this since the Lenovo E540 has a really annoying
firmware compared to those UEFI firmware we used to have with the upper class
models around here (for instance, annoying loud beeping although no-beep is
configured and so on ...).

>
> If we should or should not use EFI/BOOT path - perhaps the installer should
> prefer vendor path by default. But till there is confusion, there should be
> some notes in some documentation...
>
> rgds,
> toomas
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current_at_freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"