Hi Stephen,
Could you expand upon what handles booting from extX directly means?
Upstream U-Boot has supported ext2/3 for as long as I've been involved
with it (which admittedly isn't that long), and ext4 support was added
recently. This allows U-Boot commands extload or load to access ext*
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:11:04AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set that
makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM systems using
u-boot. I have based a lot of my thoughts on how calxeda ship their
systems
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 04:07:08PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 22:35:08 -0600
Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 08/09/2013 05:00 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 08/09/2013 04:49 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 5205748d.7060...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
It appears boot time and increased complexity are no concern to you?
I don't think this is any different than a BIOS booting grub on x86.
Probably not. But do we really have to chose the worst possible
example as
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 12:11:38PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Why should the boot process take a minute or more when it could be
done in a few seconds instead?
It takes your x86 kit a minute to load grub? Hyperbole doesn't
help advance technical discussions. Chaining another bootloader
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 20:48:24 +0200
Dirk Müller d...@dmllr.de wrote:
Hi Dennis,
right or wrong we want things to be simple for the user and to
largely look like a linux system on x86 would. The user and distro
should never need to worry about memory locations
so this would mean similar
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 16:20:06 -0600
Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 08/03/2013 01:11 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set
that makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM
systems using u-boot. I
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 22:35:08 -0600
Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 08/09/2013 05:00 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 08/09/2013 04:49 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 52056b16.7050...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
There's also the possibility of
On 08/03/2013 01:11 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set that
makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM systems using
u-boot. I have based a lot of my thoughts on how calxeda ship their
systems configured as it
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 52056b16.7050...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
There's also the possibility of chain-loading e.g. Grub from U-Boot,
which I think would satisfy at least some of your desires, although
there would still be a need for U-Boot's bootcmd to know to modified to
be able
On 08/09/2013 04:49 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 52056b16.7050...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
There's also the possibility of chain-loading e.g. Grub from U-Boot,
which I think would satisfy at least some of your desires, although
there would still be a need for
On 08/09/2013 05:00 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 08/09/2013 04:49 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 52056b16.7050...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
There's also the possibility of chain-loading e.g. Grub from U-Boot,
which I think would satisfy at least some of your
Hi Dennis,
right or wrong we want things to be simple for the user and to largely
look like a linux system on x86 would. The user and distro should never
need to worry about memory locations
so this would mean similar partitioning. i.e. /boot on ext4 root and
swap on lvm or as raw
On 08/08/2013 12:48 PM, Dirk Müller wrote:
...
Therefore, the openSUSE on ARM team has a locally patched version of
u-boot that handles booting from extX directly, because we did not
like to use FAT or anything similar for /boot, and didn't see the need
for adding a special /load (or similar)
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 02:01:12PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 08/08/2013 12:48 PM, Dirk M?ller wrote:
...
Therefore, the openSUSE on ARM team has a locally patched version of
u-boot that handles booting from extX directly, because we did not
like to use FAT or anything similar for
Dear Stephen Warren,
In message 520021e4.4070...@wwwdotorg.org you wrote:
Pluggable protocol modules a la UEFI would solve that;-)
Load UEFI as payload from U-Boot instead of Linux, and let UEFI do the
rest of the work?
me runs and hides ;-)
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk
--
DENX Software
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 11:08:57AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 3 August 2013 08:11, Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us wrote:
when it comes to memory addressing a distro and user shouldn't need to
know anything. Ideally u-boot will auto allocate addresses based on the
size of loaded objects.
On 08/03/2013 01:11 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set that
makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM systems using
u-boot. I have based a lot of my thoughts on how calxeda ship their
systems configured as it
On 08/05/2013 12:39 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
...
Note that I'm also in the process of pushing a project to github that
creates a few boot.scr that fit into this model. I've written the code,
and hope to have IP approval to upload it very soon. Aside from the
example above, it also supports
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:11:04AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set that
makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM systems using
u-boot. I have based a lot of my thoughts on how calxeda ship their
systems
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 12:39:03 -0600
Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 08/03/2013 01:11 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set
that makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM
systems using u-boot. I
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:01:32 -0400
Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:11:04AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set
that makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM
systems using
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 02:50:59PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 12:39:03 -0600
Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 08/03/2013 01:11 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
[snip]
when it comes to memory addressing a distro and user shouldn't need
to know anything.
On 08/05/2013 01:50 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 12:39:03 -0600 Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org
wrote:
On 08/03/2013 01:11 AM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set
that makes it simpler for the different distros to
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 03:11:20PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:01:32 -0400
Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:11:04AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
[snip]
bootz and raw initrd support. not having to wrap kernels and initrds
really is a must.
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 12:48:25 -0600
Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 08/05/2013 12:39 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
...
Note that I'm also in the process of pushing a project to github
that creates a few boot.scr that fit into this model. I've written
the code, and hope to have
Dear Dennis,
In message 20130805145059.14c35...@adria.ausil.us you wrote:
right, but at the least it needs to be ext4 not all boards today read
ext4, btrfs may be something down the road also. u-boot doesnt need to
care too much. it just needs to look in / and /boot
Where exactly do you raw
On 08/05/2013 02:11 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:01:32 -0400
Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:11:04AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set
that makes it simpler for the different
On 08/05/2013 02:43 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
...
Please look into Tom's proposal to got the SPL / Falcon mode way. I
fully agre with him there.
From my reading of doc/README.falcon, in order to use it, you still must
set everything up in order to do a full non-falcon boot, and then simply
save
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:25:45 -0400
Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 03:11:20PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:01:32 -0400
Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at 02:11:04AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
[snip]
bootz and raw initrd
On 08/05/2013 02:26 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 12:48:25 -0600
Stephen Warren swar...@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 08/05/2013 12:39 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
...
Note that I'm also in the process of pushing a project to github
that creates a few boot.scr that fit into this
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 02:49:58PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 08/05/2013 02:43 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
...
Please look into Tom's proposal to got the SPL / Falcon mode way. I
fully agre with him there.
From my reading of doc/README.falcon, in order to use it, you still must
set
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 03:54:03PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 16:25:45 -0400
Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 03:11:20PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
On Mon, 5 Aug 2013 15:01:32 -0400
Tom Rini tr...@ti.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 03, 2013 at
On 08/05/2013 03:00 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 02:49:58PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 08/05/2013 02:43 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: ...
Please look into Tom's proposal to got the SPL / Falcon mode
way. I fully agre with him there.
From my reading of doc/README.falcon, in
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 03:09:55PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 08/05/2013 03:00 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Mon, Aug 05, 2013 at 02:49:58PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
On 08/05/2013 02:43 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: ...
Please look into Tom's proposal to got the SPL / Falcon mode
way. I
Hi Wolfgang,
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 22:43:39 +0200
Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Dennis,
In message 20130805145059.14c35...@adria.ausil.us you wrote:
right, but at the least it needs to be ext4 not all boards today
read ext4, btrfs may be something down the road also. u-boot
On 08/05/2013 03:08 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
Hi Wolfgang,
On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 22:43:39 +0200
Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Dennis,
In message 20130805145059.14c35...@adria.ausil.us you wrote:
right, but at the least it needs to be ext4 not all boards today
read ext4, btrfs
Dear Dennis Gilmore,
In message 20130803021104.1feca...@adria.ausil.us you wrote:
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set that
makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM systems using
u-boot. I have based a lot of my thoughts on how calxeda ship their
Hi Wolfgang,
On Sun, 04 Aug 2013 21:48:00 +0200
Wolfgang Denk w...@denx.de wrote:
Dear Dennis Gilmore,
In message 20130803021104.1feca...@adria.ausil.us you wrote:
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set
that makes it simpler for the different distros to
Hi all,
I wanted to start a discussion on defining a unified feature set that
makes it simpler for the different distros to support ARM systems using
u-boot. I have based a lot of my thoughts on how calxeda ship their
systems configured as it works fairly well, recently i sent in a patch
On 3 August 2013 08:11, Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us wrote:
when it comes to memory addressing a distro and user shouldn't need to
know anything. Ideally u-boot will auto allocate addresses based on the
size of loaded objects. starting with a base address internal to u-boot
you load a
41 matches
Mail list logo
