Hacker News
points by cowlevel 1 day ago | 0 comments
If you used a standard UEFI interface you'd either imprison the OS within the UEFI using UEFI interfaces to hardware, or you'd imprison it within an inaccurate hardware description (either DT or ACPI) that it would be forced to adhere to. The current situation is complete OS freedom (except for TrustZone and secure boot) but it turns out that isn't actually what we wanted.
[–] za_creature 21 hours ago
I fail to see how the relevant UEFI service wouldn't be affected by the same inaccuracy in the hardware description, if it exists.
Hacker News