On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 08:09:50AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 15:37 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > And yet it's the only mode in which the firmrware is actually tested > > against an OS, so we don't have any real choice in the matter. > > Agree for x86 ... we just have to cope with the implementations we see > in the field. However, ARM has much more scope to have the UEFI > implementation developed collaboratively with Linux as the reference > platform. If we can convince the ARM implementors that > SetVirtualAddressMap is an accident waiting to happen, they might be > more flexible. The majority of existing ARM UEFI implementations have only ever been used to boot Windows, so like I said, this really isn't a safe assumption. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
