From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753423Ab3F0R23 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 27 Jun 2013 13:28:29 -0400
Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:34553 "EHLO
	cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751569Ab3F0R21 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 27 Jun 2013 13:28:27 -0400
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 18:28:17 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org>,
        Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>,
        Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "patches@linaro.org" <patches@linaro.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, matt.fleming@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Documentation: arm: [U]EFI runtime services
Message-ID: <20130627172817.GB16316@srcf.ucam.org>
References: <51CA2B03.4080106@wwwdotorg.org>
 <CACxGe6vsBKnbipR-Zd1T9Ox1J2ugFmShrGXGUzPa_=D9TJvFQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130626135311.GA9078@rocoto.smurfnet.nu>
 <20130626135933.GQ22026@console-pimps.org>
 <1372257499.2168.5.camel@dabdike>
 <20130627013219.GA346@srcf.ucam.org>
 <CACxGe6uFkbuJ3BxM=A0Lu=jZQ79Ba8SmNsdBdTOO13szTfTZ=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1372314821.557.33.camel@dabdike>
 <20130627143714.GA12900@srcf.ucam.org>
 <1372345790.2522.26.camel@dabdike>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1372345790.2522.26.camel@dabdike>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mjg59@cavan.codon.org.uk
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cavan.codon.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

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@srcf.ucam.org