On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 04:08:54PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > On 11/11/13 at 11:58pm, Greg KH wrote: > > > kexec-tools can have a fallback to debugfs if we really need it, but > > > making people mount debugfs to have some essential piece of > > > functionality scares the heck out of me. > > > > I agree, that would not be good. > > > > I'm not sure what exactly the sysfs file is wanting to look like? The > > efi section variable sysfs file isn't ok (multiple lines with multiple > > values.) What is this going to look like? > > The current structure in debugfs is like below, export every field of setup > header as one file will be too much IMHO: > [root@darkstar debug]# tree boot_params > boot_params > ├── data /* binary data of setup header */ > ├── setup_data /* setup_data link list nodes */ > │ ├── 0 > │ │ ├── data /* binary data of setup data */ > │ │ └── type /* type of setup data */ > │ └── 1 > │ ├── data > │ └── type > └── version /* boot protocol version */ And these binary data blobs are a "standard" somewhere, and will not change per kernel version change? If so, that structure is fine with me. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
