[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130819213005.GA30211@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 22:30:05 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: UEFI Plugfest 2013 -- New Orleans
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:06:51PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> You effectively seem to be suggesting that nothing will ever get better
> on the UEFI side, and the only benefit of the plugfest is that we get to
> see the latest brokenness and try to come up with a workaround for it
> before the consumers are afflicted with it?
Pretty much. There's a decent chance that board vendors already have the
broken code before we end up testing against it.
> That's a really pessimistic view, and I'd really like us to be a little
> more optimistic. Things can't be, or at least can't *stay*, that bad.
> Surely?
Most vendors don't care about testing against Linux, and we can't make
them care. What they're more likely to test against is the SCT, and
extending that to cover a wider range of test cases (such as exhausting
variable space) is much more likely to result in things being caught
before anything is shipped - but even then, board vendors are going to
take IBV code, perform "value add", never run a test suite and just make
sure it boots Windows.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists