3 ms·

Also, talking about the OF device tree duplicating functionality in ACPI like it's a bad thing. ACPI is a huge shitshow, if transitioning from legacy BIOS to so

Also, talking about the OF device tree duplicating functionality in ACPI like it's a bad thing. ACPI is a huge shitshow, if transitioning from legacy BIOS to something other than UEFI happened maybe we could have killed it off and done something better. With that said, UEFI isn't TERRIBLE - the complexity is hard to overlook and for all the benefits boot services among other things can bring it's rarely used by anybody but Apple.

wolfgke 9y ago
> With that said, UEFI isn't TERRIBLE - the complexity is hard to overlook UEFI is not actually that complex (though not a jewel of tinyness). There are lots of features that are optional. So in principle it is possible to build a quite small UEFI implementation if desired. The problem is that most mainboard vendors deliver very bloated implementations. I actually can understand there reasoning: They only want to (barely) support one implementation. If a feature is left out, there will be customers that complain. On the other hand, if they leave it in, it "suffices" to add an option in in the UEFI configuration tool that enables the user to disable the feature.
- justinjlynn 9y ago
  well, to be fair, they generally buy implementations from third party vendors. Those vendors throw things in for competitive advantage because some other vendor footed the bill for implementation and "why maintain multiple builds or a kconfig file". It's a bit of a crap spiral. If the implementations were open source with a strong consulting component for integration you'd probably see less non-removable bloat.
  - wolfgke 9y ago
    > If the implementations were open source with a strong consulting component for integration you'd probably see less non-removable bloat. I believe about all UEFI implementations are based on the open source (though not copyleft) TianoCore implementation.
    - justinjlynn 9y ago
      That's probably true. This likely means that almost nothing is upstreamed, so it may as well be proprietary software once it flows through to the manufacturers and us. Copyleft is an incredibly important concept and this is a good illustration of why "restricted" freedom for some can result in greater freedom for end users and developers. Freedom from proprietary software is just as important as the freedom to create it.

wolfgke 9y ago

> With that said, UEFI isn't TERRIBLE - the complexity is hard to overlook UEFI is not actually that complex (though not a jewel of tinyness). There are lots of features that are optional. So in principle it is possible to build a quite small UEFI implementation if desired. The problem is that most mainboard vendors deliver very bloated implementations. I actually can understand there reasoning: They only want to (barely) support one implementation. If a feature is left out, there will be customers that complain. On the other hand, if they leave it in, it "suffices" to add an option in in the UEFI configuration tool that enables the user to disable the feature.

justinjlynn 9y ago
well, to be fair, they generally buy implementations from third party vendors. Those vendors throw things in for competitive advantage because some other vendor footed the bill for implementation and "why maintain multiple builds or a kconfig file". It's a bit of a crap spiral. If the implementations were open source with a strong consulting component for integration you'd probably see less non-removable bloat.
- wolfgke 9y ago
  > If the implementations were open source with a strong consulting component for integration you'd probably see less non-removable bloat. I believe about all UEFI implementations are based on the open source (though not copyleft) TianoCore implementation.
  - justinjlynn 9y ago
    That's probably true. This likely means that almost nothing is upstreamed, so it may as well be proprietary software once it flows through to the manufacturers and us. Copyleft is an incredibly important concept and this is a good illustration of why "restricted" freedom for some can result in greater freedom for end users and developers. Freedom from proprietary software is just as important as the freedom to create it.