Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Feature]: Add function in config editor to read/write system variable in runtime #408

Closed
kanechen66 opened this issue Oct 15, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
state:needs-maintainer-feedback Needs more information from a maintainer to determine next steps state:needs-triage Needs to triaged to determine next steps type:feature-request A new feature proposal urgency:low Little to no impact

Comments

@kanechen66
Copy link
Contributor

Feature Overview

Problem statement:

  1. To read/write BIOS var during runtime, we need to use WriteConfVarListToUefiVars.py ReadUefiVarsToConfVarList.py, and configeditor altogether.
    it sometimes creates confusion by testers because they are not sure whether the settings are really read from or written to the system.
  2. There is not status box in the tool to tell what configeditor has done or what xml, vl file is loaded.

Proposal:
To gain efficiency and avoid confusion, it will be great if we can have a menu/button in config editor to read/write variable directly.
The status textbox in the bottom will be very helpful for users/testers to understand the current status of ConfigEditor

Solution Overview

Here is the proposed solution. pls check the below picture
Image

Alternatives Considered

No response

Urgency

Low

Are you going to implement the feature request?

I will implement the feature

Do you need maintainer feedback?

Maintainer feedback requested

Anything else?

No response

@kanechen66 kanechen66 added state:needs-triage Needs to triaged to determine next steps type:feature-request A new feature proposal labels Oct 15, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added state:needs-maintainer-feedback Needs more information from a maintainer to determine next steps urgency:low Little to no impact labels Oct 15, 2024
@apop5
Copy link
Contributor

apop5 commented Oct 17, 2024

I think this would be fine.

A couple of pitfalls that have to be addressed as part of this design

  • This needs to be tied to the current system. It needs some way to know that the XML loaded matches what is currently running on the system, and that the XML is not some older version, or some random xml file that was pulled from somewhere else.
  • It will need to delete the variables as well, essentially resetting the system back to use the built in defaults and not use any nvram varaible from the xml.

@kuqin12 @os-d

Any other items I am missing if this is going to be implemented?

@MarcChen46
Copy link
Contributor

I think this would be fine.

A couple of pitfalls that have to be addressed as part of this design

  • This needs to be tied to the current system. It needs some way to know that the XML loaded matches what is currently running on the system, and that the XML is not some older version, or some random xml file that was pulled from somewhere else.
  • It will need to delete the variables as well, essentially resetting the system back to use the built in defaults and not use any nvram varaible from the xml.

@kuqin12 @os-d

Any other items I am missing if this is going to be implemented?

The idea about delete variables for resetting the system back to default is a good suggestion.
For the XML compatible check, so far since there is no version or data info from BIOS image, so far I can only think about checking the variable size the same with sum of XML, unless we can add some more version info in the XML and save it in NVRAM, any other suggestion on the XML compatible check?

@kanechen66
Copy link
Contributor Author

the PR is landed. so close this issue

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
state:needs-maintainer-feedback Needs more information from a maintainer to determine next steps state:needs-triage Needs to triaged to determine next steps type:feature-request A new feature proposal urgency:low Little to no impact
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants