From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
Chandramouli Narayanan <mouli@linux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
pjones@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 -v4] x86_64 EFI runtime service support: EFI basic runtime service support
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:39:13 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1y7dr3xha.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4720CCBC.1050700@zytor.com> (H. Peter Anvin's message of "Thu, 25 Oct 2007 10:05:00 -0700")
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes:
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 10:55:44 -0600
>> ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think there is a compelling case for us to use any efi
>>> services at this time
>>
>> I would almost agree with this if it wasn't for the 1 call that OS
>> installers need to tell EFI about bootloader stuff; I've cc'd Peter
>> Jones since he'll know better what OS installers need; if they don't
>> need it after all...
>>
>
> Well, the original motivation for all of this was to enable implementation of a
> EFI framebuffer (UGA/GOP). Now, you can say what you want about EFI (and I
> definitely have my opinion on it), but that seems legitimate to me.
To be very clear. I think we need the EFI boot parameters but
we certainly don't runtime services to implement an EFI framebuffer.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-25 17:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-25 6:57 Huang, Ying
2007-10-25 16:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-25 16:28 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-25 16:55 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-25 16:56 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-10-25 17:05 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-25 17:39 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2007-10-25 17:51 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-25 18:04 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-25 20:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-25 22:20 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-25 22:29 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-26 2:31 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-26 2:14 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-25 17:06 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-26 1:28 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-25 17:06 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-25 17:08 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-25 17:30 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-26 2:12 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-26 1:03 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-26 8:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-26 9:30 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-26 10:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-26 11:37 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-26 11:31 ` Alan Cox
2007-10-26 17:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-29 1:05 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-26 3:36 ` Huang, Ying
2007-10-26 4:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2007-10-25 17:01 ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-26 1:17 ` Huang, Ying
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m1y7dr3xha.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mouli@linux.intel.com \
--cc=pjones@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome