On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 07:02:26PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
For example, if the end consumer wants an smbios table,
This is exactly my point:
End consumer is oblivious to these data structures, and rightly so. End consumer only wants $kernel to run and be featureful.
$kernel wants BIOSisms to run and be featureful.
We have to provide BIOSisms for $kernels for now.
But we have a unique opportunity to revise these data structures now!
By creating a good intermediate format, we will eventually be able to replace many if not all BIOSisms with something better documented, maybe even something simpler and certainly something nicer.
why translate from "coreboot->coreboot table->legacybios->smbios table" when we can just go from "coreboot->smbios table"?
Staying true to the design that coreboot is not a BIOS, but something better.
Adding an additional program in between seems to make things more complicated.
Short term, yes - slightly more complicated but much better structured. Long term the additional program dies.
//Peter