I'm just fine with importing it.

  Nate

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yea, we had separate repositories before HP re-licensed the code to a
> BSD license. Currently the separation doesn't make any sense.
>
> Ali
>
>
> On Jan 10, 2009, at 9:22 PM, Steve Reinhardt wrote:
>
>> I think the only reason it's in a separate repository is because it's
>> derived from some Compaq/HP code and probably has a different license.
>> If we were to implement an EFI BIOS from scratch (presumably just a
>> fake one that follows the API) then I think it could live in the main
>> repo.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Ali Saidi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Yea the alpha-system repository. Although it could be called
>>> something
>>> else. At one point we talked about having a system directory in m5
>>> that contained alpha/sparc/... code. That is probably a good bet.
>>>
>>> Ali
>>>
>>> On Jan 10, 2009, at 8:48 PM, Gabe Black wrote:
>>>
>>>> We actually have an implementation for Alpha's equivalent, right?
>>>> The
>>>> console binary? Do we have that in a separate repository? Would we
>>>> do
>>>> that for our BIOS of whichever flavor?
>>>>
>>>> Gabe
>>>>
>>>> nathan binkert wrote:
>>>>> My guess is that people want to run Linux, OpenSolaris, and maybe
>>>>> someday windows.  I think that OpenSolaris can probably do EFI.
>>>>> Also,
>>>>> the bios emulation is a software thing that you can probably load
>>>>> as a
>>>>> loader and runs on top of EFI, so maybe we can use that if it
>>>>> matters.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess this is a vote in favor of EFI if it is indeed easier to
>>>>> implement.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 1:20 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> According to Wikipedia, the following started supporting EFI at
>>>>>> some point:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Linux with elilo
>>>>>> HP-UX on IA-64
>>>>>> OpenVMS
>>>>>> OSX
>>>>>> Windows 2000 on Itanium
>>>>>> Windows Server 2003 for IA-64
>>>>>> Windows XP 64-bit Edition
>>>>>> Windows blah blah.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> EFI is the only supported mechanism to boot OSX, I believe, and
>>>>>> BIOS is the only
>>>>>> supported mechanism to boot basically anything not in the list
>>>>>> above. The list
>>>>>> fortunately has most important OSes, but that would include DOS
>>>>>> for example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Basically, OSX has switched completely because they control the
>>>>>> whole hardware
>>>>>> stack. I think everyone else is switching too, but because people
>>>>>> apparently
>>>>>> still want to run windows 95 on their 16 way super servers they're
>>>>>> taking
>>>>>> longer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gabe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Quoting nathan binkert <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd say whichever is easier.  What guests are in each camp?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nate
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 10:50 AM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't plan on doing any work on this in the near future, but
>>>>>>>> what are
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> people's
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> opinions about implementing an EFI BIOS for m5 rather than a
>>>>>>>> traditional
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BIOS? I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> think EFI would be easier to implement and work with and easier
>>>>>>>> to get
>>>>>>>> documentation and support tools for, but a traditional BIOS
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> potentially
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> be compatible with more guests. EFI supports a compatibility
>>>>>>>> layer, but at
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> point we'd be approximating implementing both, I think. That may
>>>>>>>> be ok
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> because I
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> think most BIOS services are ignored by most modern guests, with
>>>>>>>> the fairly
>>>>>>>> minor exception of a boot loader.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Gabe
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> m5-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> m5-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> m5-dev mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> m5-dev mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> m5-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> m5-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> m5-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
m5-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/m5-dev

Reply via email to