Re: UEFI Plugfest 2013 -- New Orleans

[Matthew Garrett <mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org>]

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 | mjg59-1xO5oi07KQx4cg9Nei1l7Q@public.gmane.org