Simple Firmware Interface?

[Robinson Tryon]

I just found a story in the Slashdot queue about a new Intel project
called the "Simple Firmware Interface" (http://simplefirmware.org/).
According to the project website, SFI is "a method for platform
firmware to export static tables to the operating system (OS)" and
looks to be a lightweight replacement for ACPI.

I haven't found any mention of SFI on either Wikipedia or on the
coreboot wiki. Does anyone have further information on the project?

Thanks,
--R

Here's the story in the /. queue:
http://slashdot.org/firehose.pl?op=view&id=4979253

Here's the link to the announcement:
http://www.h-online.com/open/Intel-develops-simpler-alternative-to-ACPI-for-...

Looks someone from Intel will be giving a talk at Linux Symposium 2009:
http://www.linuxsymposium.org/2009/view_abstract.php?content_key=82

[Patrick Georgi]

Am 25.06.2009 22:56, schrieb Robinson Tryon:
> I just found a story in the Slashdot queue about a new Intel project
> called the "Simple Firmware Interface" (http://simplefirmware.org/).
> According to the project website, SFI is "a method for platform
> firmware to export static tables to the operating system (OS)" and
> looks to be a lightweight replacement for ACPI.
>
> I haven't found any mention of SFI on either Wikipedia or on the
> coreboot wiki. Does anyone have further information on the project?

It's a subset of ACPI, looks quite Intel specific, and the FAQ (and the 
draft standard, I think) state that if both, ACPI and SFI are available, 
ACPI should be used.

So, nothing to worry about.

Regards,
Patrick

[Peter Stuge]

Patrick Georgi wrote:
> It's a subset of ACPI, looks quite Intel specific, and the FAQ (and
> the draft standard, I think) state that if both, ACPI and SFI are
> available, ACPI should be used.
>
> So, nothing to worry about.

I don't know. I think SFI seems to be a good thing. I believe we will
want to support it.

//Peter

[Stefan Reinauer]

On 02.07.2009, at 12:51, Peter Stuge  wrote:
> Patrick Georgi wrote:
> > It's a subset of ACPI, looks quite Intel specific, and the FAQ (and
> > the draft standard, I think) state that if both, ACPI and SFI are
> > available, ACPI should be used.
> >
> > So, nothing to worry about.
>
> I don't know. I think SFI seems to be a good thing. I believe we will
> want to support it.
>
> //Peter

Sure,.. I guess if you are interested in SFI you should send a patch;  
it won't be denied.

Are there any OSes that support SFI? Maybe it could even be  
incorporated into the coreboot table?

Stefan
>

[Peter Stuge]

Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> > > So, nothing to worry about.
> >
> > I don't know. I think SFI seems to be a good thing. I believe we
> > will want to support it.
>
> Sure,.. I guess if you are interested in SFI you should send a
> patch; it won't be denied.

Yep.
> Are there any OSes that support SFI? Maybe it could even be
> incorporated into the coreboot table?

There's a Linux git tree on simplefirmware.org.

//Peter