and of course, UEFI has nothing to do with the “server” segment. it doesn’t matter what use cases are for your board, UEFI is a booting firmware designed to fit not only the server range, but desktop, mobile embedded too, every computing device boots. don’t let confuse yourself. “even RHEL” shouldn’t be even a goal, again firmware standrads exist for exactly opposite purposes - namely give the easiest way to support booting of everything following the standard. not just a specific distribution of something. we already have uboot - a linux only loader. UEFI is for giving the possibility for booting everything from Linux to Windows.
I understand it might be challenging to get it working even having a solid baseground as edk2 is, but don’t give up, it will pay off in much more later. as Cthugha mentioned uboot mimicking UEFI isn’t really UEFI.
UEFI boot protocol is supported in U-Boot, so UEFI boot works on Khadas VIM (tested by myself with openSUSE Tumbleweed). And more EFI parts will be added in U-Boot (support of EFI Shell should be possible in the future).
So, as S912 CPU is close to S905 CPU, support for it should also be possible in the future.
Ironically, support of UEFI boot has been implemented for Khadas VIM before VIM2
The good thing is that mainline U-Boot can be use on Khadas VIM, and that should also be the case for VIM2.
@Gouwa: could it be possible for you to add your specifics U-Boot development for VIM2 (kvim command, if I remember) to official U-Boot instead of the old Amlogic version? Could be more useful for the OpenSource community
Yes, that’s why Khadas team should now work closer to official U-Boot!
@Gouwa: I saw the VIM2 Lite based on S905D on your website, is it already available? And why you don’t have used the S905X? It could have been easier to use an already supported SoC (supported by U-Boot and the Linux kernel).
What bottlenecks? It’s a firmware for booting an OS of your choice. It is much much more capable than uboot. If implemented in its full potential, it lets you boot from anything. What bottlenecks? It’s not like you are choosing your future wife. :lol:
ACPI isn’t part of UEFI, technically you don’t need it for having UEFI. But, of course, the SoC vendor not sharing HW info is the PITA. for implementing anything, it’s not UEFI specific.
Not true. It depends on abilities of an implementer, how bloated he/she can do it.
UEFI is an industry standard, if something doesn’t want to “happily” live with the industry standard, then that something should go away from the industry. This is especially true for android.