From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5700D60A3815 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=lists.u-boot-project.org header.i=@lists.u-boot-project.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=eiv9zNfe; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=ziyao.cc header.i=me@ziyao.cc header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=zmail header.b=B8W/ZO80 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E35E607E7; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at osuosl.org Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id uX9LxOFYkf0H; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:45 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp3.osuosl.org 57BF1607E9 Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org; arc=pass header.oldest-pass=0 smtp.remote-ip=140.211.166.142 ARC-Seal: i=3; d=osuosl.org; s=arc; a=rsa-sha256; cv=pass; t=1792586145; b=kPv6DTrDY9541pzFTU7lG9W/xc+3FV7uhdieQOe4xr1u3StM9W2v8V/b01fLJJDbrbjh lP4pCVnxbMNza3EbCM77YRRCSql9BQwFvnPPCvM6Ww6TvlU+v+WS+izoPqe2a1Me+x4bS baQHziNUyjnK2H0LqQiOoqcsxcPQlt1eH2WEVKeTF9FK8/KGltUJQZEv2a2mrhK4LxYUU o7PEAt2X+M6Q3kXW1yujHQLSSAuNRtPkBg7GGu4DTs6fDnw0d/Va9F5bWXHachonKEvAg ofqjmEmKRfeM1D/2LEr/sQw4EEGm0N3hjc5EflamicTrSSU9WGWt+FG/OnNHVYvocjw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=3; d=osuosl.org; s=arc; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792586145; h=X-Comment:DKIM-Signature:X-Original-To:Delivered-To:Received: Received:X-Virus-Scanned:X-Spam-Flag:X-Spam-Score:X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status:Received:ARC-Filter:Received-SPF:Received: DKIM-Signature:Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition: Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To:X-Zoho-Virus-Status: X-Zoho-AV-Stamp:X-ZohoMailClient:X-BeenThere:X-Mailman-Version: Precedence:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help: List-Subscribe:Errors-To; bh=W1WEeA/4ckbmQxayvL6hpRC4g6xhX9Z9SDPBste9ye4=; b=IC4rFUCpuiHJjJtwfYlTrnYnvceJzaVu3Wiz3cx4VYdlClF849fe3s6XX685XBCA5JUK I5DkMfxeTeGz8N2FIrcoFBY7Jsqnuog/dsuG6vZBu3ZAcbB188xdvBKn9NUz2Ckh2R9Ag XMaJrokFXzFbsr/1Hs0xWDzB2Jb32FmZg/KRVuKmZ/wGx5jqnBZrbqD4rCFISHE4JCFhF o+dVpWcpkfzK99wqjfyu1/cS/4sZFLUnHOcArllDMv8/MVJI8c9JksWvsS4WE9kw5Ydj3 t1bJJPOBLdrJ+88S7+rMjq6J2C8PuAxPAye8m4xJVrNVaNCeQVlo3vaSpz0p1zehjfA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=3; smtp3.osuosl.org; arc=pass header.oldest-pass=0 smtp.remote-ip=140.211.166.142 X-Comment: SPF check N/A for local connections - client-ip=140.211.166.142; helo=lists1.osuosl.org; envelope-from=u-boot-bounces@lists.u-boot-project.org; receiver= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.u-boot-project.org; s=default; t=1792586145; bh=W1WEeA/4ckbmQxayvL6hpRC4g6xhX9Z9SDPBste9ye4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=eiv9zNfeb7ivB33kaQNT/1sLrrzC3jd9rZH07Ax9EM7Aj2Cepg8G1ZL/2Sev1/Bpb kswQgVdT4WqPxZLFu471CUSl+3Gw3D7YE7TkeCmbuGUE/UjA8tMuGEEwRxVx47sO4o xjdYVUIrJLy9xQQF28UctEzX/rbxpqcAQGdcg6p1fn/5x2QTkyo8HY6Wxczec1KeL9 FMFUaRfurLFv5rQTGSEVuJMFahiO6u/CRCM/4BQ55Vx1AQPW2555ShMgYQ/HG7g01b BxWoxO/ysTXduE8QvCg26szEi838kunHxPCH7HTMCpYhvq3gQWQ0S/9a635aWCChQV mc2X9rIcOJfPA== Received: from lists1.osuosl.org (lists1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.142]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57BF1607E9; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137]) by lists1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09627930 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A8A40649 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id fyugFNjO-Ufj for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:33 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp4.osuosl.org 5500E40631 Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; arc=pass header.oldest-pass=0 smtp.remote-ip=165.173.180.12 ARC-Seal: i=2; d=osuosl.org; s=arc; a=rsa-sha256; cv=pass; t=1792586133; b=P06LdogEpWDP1h6k6lCdP+CWtULhxCBMY03L3CwLQTiv/K4jt51FZbSRk4s2xuaASfVr 3W1hpRIgs53o0kKISEJUTpVQh3tzjV6yb1d6CekPFXcRCTA+ArPxs3hbD8r/oIUzouyUt bOCpVxDZdKgvbKvf63P8NVvQWu0f6x4AMm12gDfLWG1oPP5UmwyirFRUDJz1i+QmXKqiO zhFpcMj5+klN4NuP8TL9djRXh8dBA/0k51SY/qrOGpSfMGpuY4e1nwRLu18iiyITs5Eji 2+z5g0whBgjbrAtp6tquWNJTrDlU4bOAbn95J3uTDQ8fUnN09LazPHa61xyHgWDLVFg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; d=osuosl.org; s=arc; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792586133; h=Received-SPF:DKIM-Signature:Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject: Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition: Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To:X-Zoho-Virus-Status: X-Zoho-AV-Stamp:X-ZohoMailClient; bh=W1WEeA/4ckbmQxayvL6hpRC4g6xhX9Z9SDPBste9ye4=; b=WX7yTEiIMjyJ/J/8hnddnnFwvtjudObKQlixTAAwzPyxi11peXAM1nKxdyApSBnANSJt OiXQYX46NEwchleyIwr5AkTSTSvcs5IWSiRQuicTDljd2xw7vyzwk7Fw+d2SQJMS4gTVP 7O6YomCu935brDN/howWHBxn51wURWCGR1YbseJr1T5xWvo7IbLRqvvQfj94lApEWyvcK DHH45byzR2sq8h4QyCbjK0wU/9MbnJkvRZoQ7ClhOeBOK/Qhg20/S+HbpgZVycvYpgn+e uHWsNPfDn4/UpBHdfVI4j6Ucx7drJxag7C8kE9649O62gToCqMBx1VaUqqg6UzQrRFw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; smtp4.osuosl.org; dmarc=pass header.from=ziyao.cc; dkim=pass header.d=ziyao.cc header.i=me@ziyao.cc header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=zmail header.b="B8W/ZO80"; arc=pass header.oldest-pass=0 smtp.remote-ip=165.173.180.12 Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=165.173.180.12; helo=sender6-op-o12.zoho.com; envelope-from=me@ziyao.cc; receiver= Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ziyao.cc Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=ziyao.cc header.i=me@ziyao.cc header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=zmail header.b=B8W/ZO80 Received: from sender6-op-o12.zoho.com (sender6-op-o12.zoho.com [165.173.180.12]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5500E40631 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:31 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1792586127; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=BVNcsVRjP5nzOv65iU9352VD55YYScBpQlKDPQ/K7Qbj1z9XxR5dLN+rPXtaIS0WQWOdMbTes361jobwtv1F+auXVVqqkUzmZkWKRvJ4e9KOpOJ0KxebYiqrVfMtE6J0V05oq745V0IjCrgx4l21r2zpRawmNJKMsi+1Oj+lwi8= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1792586127; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:From:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=W1WEeA/4ckbmQxayvL6hpRC4g6xhX9Z9SDPBste9ye4=; b=WArQxmoxGoUeobxQdwzPcu87hTdyBQc76k1RxbFtWh0bPBRhXfFsSdzeQZCkYQ1idMTe+dPwKjhUE2RIN1YFT+3QJY+O83wX/7jy19W4p5QWE0YHtZugz2uk4MjOrq4ATfxOGw9ZYu8wsdazW6I+mAEiEQ1bFUQ+xy2dFDZebas= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=ziyao.cc; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=me@ziyao.cc; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1792586127; s=zmail; d=ziyao.cc; i=me@ziyao.cc; h=Date:Date:From:From:To:To:Cc:Cc:Subject:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=W1WEeA/4ckbmQxayvL6hpRC4g6xhX9Z9SDPBste9ye4=; b=B8W/ZO80z4jPq88CdXJDn7pEbUCBLM0Y/ZCpi3w/p3rU7TDZvvSVylSl7/cILcA1 E7H9B1s0A3hZO6YSCfPpHSYFJ36LFKy0R7vXiCKfICkW3sI1GWOzqte/RoEtJdstIyz W+koYui36bLDJhVjhM634C08hzty49VDf4hdJ8AU= Received: by smtp.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1792586124819755.5717752811571; Wed, 21 Oct 2026 05:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2026 12:35:21 +0000 From: Yao Zi To: Umut Tezduyar Lindskog , u-boot@lists.u-boot-project.org Cc: Yao Zi Subject: Re: U-Boot UEFI implementation vs EDK II UEFI Payload Message-ID: References: X-Archived-By: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Zoho-Virus-Status: 1 X-Zoho-AV-Stamp: zmail-av-0.2.13.1.5.4/292.565.41 X-ZohoMailClient: External X-BeenThere: u-boot@lists.u-boot-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: U-Boot discussion List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.1 (2024-03-26) on aws-us-west-2-korg-listserv-alma10-1 On Tue, Oct 20, 2026 at 02:15:44PM +0200, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog wrote: > Hi, > > I have been looking into U-Boot’s UEFI implementation and trying to > understand some of the architectural decisions behind it. > > I noticed that EDK II has a UefiPayloadPkg component, which is intended to > provide UEFI services on top of an existing bootloader. This made me > curious why U-Boot maintains its own UEFI implementation rather than using > EDK II’s. > > I am not suggesting that one approach is better than the other. I am just > trying to understand the history and the trade-offs. > > I have a few questions: > > 1. Was integrating EDK II’s UefiPayloadPkg ever considered for U-Boot? If > so, what were the main reasons for choosing a native implementation? > 2. What are the main advantages of U-Boot’s native UEFI implementation > compared to using EDK II? Is it primarily about binary size, complexity, > dependencies, or having better control over the implementation? A point which I could come up with, is that one doesn't need to re-implement drivers already available in U-Boot on EDK2 with U-Boot EFI. And porting drivers from Linux to U-Boot would be easier than targetting EDK2, I think. And personally speaking, to me it's easier to work with U-Boot :) > 3. Are there any significant disadvantages to maintaining a separate UEFI > implementation? For example, keeping up with UEFI specifications, > compatibility with EFI applications, or implementing features such as > Secure Boot. > 4. Would there be any technical advantages to using EDK II’s UefiPayloadPkg > on top of U-Boot today (instead of it's own UEFI implementation)? > > I realize some of these questions might have obvious answers for people > familiar with U-Boot’s history. I am mainly interested in understanding the > design decisions and the reasoning behind having two independent > implementations. > > Thanks! > Umut Regards, Yao Zi