Hey Chris, yes it does. The PI interface is in terms of encapsulation somewhat cleaner then the FSP integration. I think that was Ron concern using PI instead of FSP.
If we talking about full customization up to the bootblock and vboot2 support I would recommend to use coreboot in combination with LinuxBoot payload. If we talk less effort to get your firmware running maybe LinuxBoot is the better approach depending on your platform. Best Regards, Philipp On 27.06.2018 13:37, chrisglow...@tutanota.com wrote: > 26. Jun 2018 20:02 by rminn...@gmail.com <mailto:rminn...@gmail.com>: > > >> For a case like this, where your choice is between two binary blobs (FSP or >> UEFI) I would argue that linuxboot is a better way to go. >> See > github.com/osresearch/heads <http://github.com/osresearch/heads>> or >> > linuxboot.org <http://linuxboot.org>> for more info. >> ron > > > Doesn't linuxbootalso require the FSP blob for memory and silicon > initialization on any Intel board after Ivy Bridge? > > > > > Thanks > > Chris > > > >
-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
