On 05/04/2021 00:01, Marvin Häuser wrote:
3. During my initial exploration, I discovered defective PPIs and protocols (e.g. returning data with no corresponding size) originating from the UEFI PI and UEFI specifications. Changes need to be discussed, settled on, and submitted to the UEFI Forum.
Would any of these changes break backwards compatibility? With the UEFI development model, any protocol that has ever existed in the specification will practically need to always be supported in that form: breaking backwards compatibility is simply not an option.
For example: there is a fundamental design flaw in the LoadImage() and StartImage() API that makes it logically impossible for arbitrary code to install an EFI_LOADED_IMAGE_PROTOCOL instance (see https://github.com/ipxe/ProxyLoaderPkg/#why-is-it-needed for details on this). But there's zero chance that this design flaw will ever be fixed, because there's no way to eliminate code that relies on the existing LoadImage()/StartImage() APIs.
So: if the formally verified image loader can fit within the constraints of "must not modify any externally exposed APIs" then it sounds like a potentially good idea. If it requires breaking changes to public APIs then I don't see how it could be integrated in practice.
Thanks, Michael -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#73800): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/73800 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/81853302/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
