On 22:30 Mon 17 Oct , Grant Likely wrote: > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Ilias Biris <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi folks > > > > https://wiki.linaro.org/OfficeofCTO/BootArchitecture/2011-10-13 has the > > meeting minutes from yesterday's discussion. I have summarised below the > > highlights and Actions recorded in the etherpad. > > Hi Ilias, > > Thanks for getting these out. > > > > ----- > > = Highlights = > > We discussed the short term pain points, which should be possible to > > address via some engineering work - priorities were discussed here is > > where the discussion was left at the end of the meeting > > > > RANKING > > - Rob's top two: 1) zImage support in u-boot. 2) How does the OS change > > which kernel gets booted. > > > > - Olivier: 1) Get grub working with u-boot - get booting from a GPT > > partition 2) zImage update process 3) GPT support > > > > - Jean-Christophe: 1) Investigate and begin using FIT image format 2) > > multiplatform kernel images 3) signed images - kernel, initrd, dtb > > > > - Grant: 1) grub or grub config file on u-boot 2) Start using GPT support > > In the absence of a lot of follow-up discussion I'm going to propose > the following ranking and set of priorities for short term pain-point > resolution that can be presented to the TSC. I'll leave this on the > table for a day or so to collect final comments before I pass this on > to David. These are the items that I think are most valuable in > preparing for "standard architecture" ARM machines with the > expectation that distributions will be using separate kernel & initrd > images, and boot loader configuration files for selecting which kernel > to boot. I also think this list captures the items that there was > consensus about on Thursday. > > 1) Add "grub" or "lilo" mode to u-boot for booting from disk > 1a) add minimal grub-like config file support to u-boot when booting from > disk > 1b) When booting from disk, make u-boot use GPT boot partition to > determine where to load config file and images > - I've grouped 1a & 1b together because they don't have much value > separately. I propose a format > > 2) Implement rudimentary boot menu support in u-boot (if it doesn't > already exist). Doesn't need to be graphical, but at least have a > default boot with a list of other boot options. take a llok on Barebox
The format I propose will use the menu implemetation to display the boot choice I really think we can have barebox on server very quicly as barebox already support the disk device and menu. And if need I've an implementation of the framebuffer console > > 3) Investigate implementing signed images a la secure boot. Need to > investigate existing secure boot formats and policies so we don't do > something gratuitously different. > > I don't disagree with the FIT image topics, but I'm not including them > in this list of recommendations because they don't have much bearing > on the task of working out ARM server infrastructure. They are usefull to have in one image multple kernel/dtb/initrd Best Regards, J. _______________________________________________ boot-architecture mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture
