On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: > > > On 12.09.14 17:45, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 12.09.14 17:05, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >>>> On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 17:11:30 +0300 >>>> Riku Voipio <riku.voi...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I've just invited a bunch of attendees at linaro connect for >>>>> cross-distribution meeting in the next connect. Sadly it's not >>>>> officially on the scheduled talks, so there is no remote participation >>>>> this time. However you still have a change to reply here and add items >>>>> to our agenda :) >>>>> >>>>> Draft agenda: >>>>> >>>>> - Review status of various distributions ARMv7 and ARMv8 support >>>>> - Discuss boot environment standardization (U-Boot/UEFI/GRUB..) >>>>> - uEnv.txt >>>> armv7 should all be standardising on extlinux.conf u-boot is rapidly >>>> adopting it as the standard way for distros to boot, and have a >>>> stable know interface between the distro and u-boot >>> >>> I'm personally not quite as passionate here. My main concern is that I >>> want things to be consistent across the board at least inside of >>> openSUSE. >> >> But the problem is vendors need clear instructions for how to >> configure their u-boot correctly for distros. Having per distro >> instructions is not going to work as they will ignore the distros they >> don't care about at the time. They may not care about any distro >> either, so we have to make it trivial to enable or default. > > I agree. > >> >>> There are platforms out there that simply load a boot.scr from >>> SD card, so that's a mechanism I have to support anyway. >>> >>> That said, I wouldn't mind to provide another u-boot binary for that >>> particular platform, boot into it and then have that one check for an >>> extlinux.conf. >> >> There's probably 2 categories here: >> - No extlinux support -> needs a new u-boot build >> - extlinux support, but not the right env or boot scripts -> use >> boot.scr/uEnv.txt to fixup the environment. > > Sounds reasonable. But keep in mind that there will be quite a > significant transitioning phase. > > Also, I think for AArch64 we're pretty much set on EFI by now I think.
For servers yes, but for other things not so much. I'm working on a aarch64 chip with u-boot right now. How much the distros care about non-server focused boards varies. >>> But whatever happens, it really has to be consistent across the board, >>> and preferably still work with older downstream u-boot forks. >>> >>>>> - legacy platforms >>>>> - Installers vs pre-built images >>>> we should eb using installers where ever possible. >>> >>> Why? For most use cases the image based approach is nicer. >> >> People are going to want both. Are there different issues around >> standardization for images? > > I think standardization of images is a lot easier, because you don't > have to put board specific knowledge into the (generic) installer. > > IMHO for 32bit most of this is a lost cause - things are over and done. > For AArch64 we'll get EFI and everything I've tested there so far works > impressively well. Again, depends on the market. There's some silly people that think we'll still have 32-bit systems in 2038. ;) Rob _______________________________________________ cross-distro mailing list cross-distro@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-distro
