Stefan Reinauer wrote: > >> I suggest that coreboot designers look at how U-Boot is designed, > > > > I understand that at least previous versions of U-Boot were not > > so nice to look at. > > > > I did discuss with Denx about running the non-hardware-specific > > part of U-Boot as a payload. They were not uninterested. > > There is a new, Denx-independent branch of u-boot from Pengutronix > which we've been using on custom ARM based hardware: u-boot v2. > > It has a few less features, but a considerably nicer design. And, > the Pengutronix folks seemed very interested to see it happen as a > coreboot payload.
Yes, I've talked a lot with Wolfgang about coreboot, at several events. Maybe it was even Pengutronix people rather than Denx people I had a chat with at embeddedworld? Hmm. :) > I think this would be a real improvement for both projects, > coreboot (nice and slim, standardized user interface, could replace > FILO) as well as u-boot (access to the x86 world without > re-implementing the wheel). Agree. > I had this on my TODO, but there's been too much other stuff so > far. Yet I would love to see this happen. Maybe we get the momentum > together? So many things TODO.. :\ What does u-boot v2 need from coreboot? //Peter -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
