On Mon, 3 Jul 2023 at 15:33, 运辉崔 <cuiyunhui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi drew, > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 9:01 PM Andrew Jones <ajones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > (This is a reply to a non-existent cover letter.) > > This has been discussed many times with Ard, Please refer to : > https://patches.linaro.org/project/linux-acpi/patch/20230426034001.16-1-cuiyunhui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/ Hi Yunhui, >From that discussion it was mentioned that that arm supports 3 methods of booting: direct + devicetree EFI + devicetree EFI + ACPI ..but not direct + ACPI To me it isn't obvious from that or this thread, and since arm seems to be doing fine without the 4th option I'm curious why that's necessary on riscv? > > I'm not a big fan of adding yet another interface. Have you considered > > doing something like [1]? > > > > [1] https://github.com/tianocore/tianocore.github.io/wiki/UefiPayloadPkg Also you didn't answer this question, which I'd also like to hear a reply to. /Emil > > Thanks, > > drew > > Thanks, > Yunhui > > _______________________________________________ > linux-riscv mailing list > linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
