Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35

Thread: Mark Shuttleworth Calls For An End To ACPI

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,620

    Default Mark Shuttleworth Calls For An End To ACPI

    Phoronix: Mark Shuttleworth Calls For An End To ACPI

    Mark Shuttleworth has called for an end to ACPI (the Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) and other executable firmwares that could prove to be attack vectors on PCs, phones, and other devices...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTYzMjg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    275

    Default

    Right on. Given how much trouble ACPI has caused !Windows operating systems, it is good that Shuttleworth is taking advantage of his highly visible position to attempt to drive interest in this area.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    38

    Default

    For once I agree 100% with Shuttleworth. The Operating System should be Sovereign - no firmware should ever run on the main CPU after the kernel has booted! NONE!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    327

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shaurz View Post
    For once I agree 100% with Shuttleworth. The Operating System should be Sovereign - no firmware should ever run on the main CPU after the kernel has booted! NONE!
    100% this ^


    Operating systems have been able to be biosless, one day I hope we have an open computing platform however with intel incorporating more and more drm it's likely we are going in the opposite direction. Even AMD seems to be headed that way.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Old Europe
    Posts
    910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nightmarex View Post
    100% this ^


    Operating systems have been able to be biosless, one day I hope we have an open computing platform however with intel incorporating more and more drm it's likely we are going in the opposite direction. Even AMD seems to be headed that way.
    I agree, but let's face it - Utopia.

    Please, correct me if I'm wrong.

    Many hardware suppliers use closed firmware to diversify their products, based on the same chipset.
    They even tell you that this is one crucial pillar of the business.
    It's not hard to see that they simply won't change this - unfortunately.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    150

    Default

    Then what does he propose to replace ACPI?

    If we intend to remove potential harmful firmware, then we need to target the worst of them all; EFI. EFI has full access to any device in the computer.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    41

    Default Putting his money/code where his mouth is

    Quote Originally Posted by Serge View Post
    Right on. Given how much trouble ACPI has caused !Windows operating systems, it is good that Shuttleworth is taking advantage of his highly visible position to attempt to drive interest in this area.
    He needs to put his money/code where his mouth is.

    Until then, his statement is as weighty as his support for Wayland.

    If he wants to change the system, he cant just call for it and others do the same. Code matters.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    879

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by You- View Post
    He needs to put his money/code where his mouth is.

    Until then, his statement is as weighty as his support for Wayland.

    If he wants to change the system, he cant just call for it and others do the same. Code matters.
    In all honesty he's just one in a long line of people who can't really do anything at all to change the current situation who have complained about it, SteamMachines give Valve the ability to try something but otherwise we're left at the behest of Microsoft to change the status quo. In spite of how far the coreboot guys have gotten, they've really gotten nowhere in terms of marketshare because it's not just code that's required here but basically ability to strongarm the motherboard manufacturers into doing what you want.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,447

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shaurz View Post
    For once I agree 100% with Shuttleworth.
    this^

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,538

    Default

    It seems that his main objection is to DSDT tables etc. But those are tied to the firmware (and they're much better than what was in APM times, where PnP BIOS controlled everything to begin with). So the main thing is to get rid of the firmware, for which Coreboot is the obvious answer (it deals with DSDT by providing open DSDT files). Sure, something better than ACPI would be nice (as usual vendors often screw up and ship broken DSDT), but that's not the main issue.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •