Re: [U-Boot] U-boot for 64bit ARMv8
> -Original Messages- > From: tiger...@viatech.com.cn > Sent Time: 2014-01-23 14:44:36 (Thursday) > To: u-boot@lists.denx.de > Cc: > Subject: [U-Boot] U-boot for 64bit ARMv8 > > Hi, experts: > I found ARMv8/Exceptions.S only created a 8 items vector table. > > But based on ARMv8 Arch Ref Manual, it should create 16 items in a > vector table: > Current Exception level with SP_EL0 : 4 items > Current Exception level with SP_Elx : 4 items > EL immediately lower than target_EL is using AARCH64 : 4 items > EL immediately lower than target_EL is using AARCH32 : 4 items > > Are current 8 items enough? Or will patch it in the future? > Currently, u-boot for aarch64 does not provide any run time service. So, the low level exception entries are not implemented. Best wishes, ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] U-boot for 64bit ARMv8
Hi Tom, On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:47:18 -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:54:54PM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:33:39 -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:10:06AM -0700, Richard Schmitt wrote: > > > > > > > Is anyone considering porting/supporting uboot for ARMv8. ?Our initial > > > > investigation of boot loader support for ARMv8 indicates that the only > > > > boot loader currently being targeted is UEFI. ? > > > > > > > > The decisions we need to make are: > > > > - Do we move to UEFI on ARM? > > > > - Can we leverage someone else's enablement of ARMv8? > > > > - Do we provide our own enablement of ARMv8? > > > > > > > > Any opinions? > > > > > > The general push from ARM Ltd is to use UEFI. I would strongly suspect > > > that there are U-Boot forks that companies that have announced they are > > > doing ARMv8 chips have something as a stop-gap until they have the > > > functionality they want in uEFI. > > > > > > I am quite open to ARMv8 support being added to U-Boot and addressing > > > the concerns companies may have. Sometimes it seems like "GPLv2+" makes > > > people think "Project will be moving to GPLv3, RUN AWAY!" when all it > > > really means is "Project is GPLv2+, will evaluate the appropriateness of > > > later versions". > > > > This is not specific to 64-Bit ARM support, though. GPLv2+ has been > > there for very long. Aren't companies educated by now? (I am quite open > > to helping spread education, anyway) > > Indeed, it applies to the project as a whole. I have however, gotten > some private feedback that to me says that there are companies out there > afraid that because we retain our "+" we're going to switch to GPLv3 any > minute, rather than keeping our options open, should some future GPL > provide a compromise both developers, companies and regular consumers > can live with. Maybe some FAQ entry about the licence [version] on the Denx project might make things easier. Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] U-boot for 64bit ARMv8
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:54:54PM +0200, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:33:39 -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:10:06AM -0700, Richard Schmitt wrote: > > > > > Is anyone considering porting/supporting uboot for ARMv8. ?Our initial > > > investigation of boot loader support for ARMv8 indicates that the only > > > boot loader currently being targeted is UEFI. ? > > > > > > The decisions we need to make are: > > > - Do we move to UEFI on ARM? > > > - Can we leverage someone else's enablement of ARMv8? > > > - Do we provide our own enablement of ARMv8? > > > > > > Any opinions? > > > > The general push from ARM Ltd is to use UEFI. I would strongly suspect > > that there are U-Boot forks that companies that have announced they are > > doing ARMv8 chips have something as a stop-gap until they have the > > functionality they want in uEFI. > > > > I am quite open to ARMv8 support being added to U-Boot and addressing > > the concerns companies may have. Sometimes it seems like "GPLv2+" makes > > people think "Project will be moving to GPLv3, RUN AWAY!" when all it > > really means is "Project is GPLv2+, will evaluate the appropriateness of > > later versions". > > This is not specific to 64-Bit ARM support, though. GPLv2+ has been > there for very long. Aren't companies educated by now? (I am quite open > to helping spread education, anyway) Indeed, it applies to the project as a whole. I have however, gotten some private feedback that to me says that there are companies out there afraid that because we retain our "+" we're going to switch to GPLv3 any minute, rather than keeping our options open, should some future GPL provide a compromise both developers, companies and regular consumers can live with. -- Tom signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] U-boot for 64bit ARMv8
Hi Tom, On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:33:39 -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:10:06AM -0700, Richard Schmitt wrote: > > > Is anyone considering porting/supporting uboot for ARMv8. ?Our initial > > investigation of boot loader support for ARMv8 indicates that the only > > boot loader currently being targeted is UEFI. ? > > > > The decisions we need to make are: > > - Do we move to UEFI on ARM? > > - Can we leverage someone else's enablement of ARMv8? > > - Do we provide our own enablement of ARMv8? > > > > Any opinions? > > The general push from ARM Ltd is to use UEFI. I would strongly suspect > that there are U-Boot forks that companies that have announced they are > doing ARMv8 chips have something as a stop-gap until they have the > functionality they want in uEFI. > > I am quite open to ARMv8 support being added to U-Boot and addressing > the concerns companies may have. Sometimes it seems like "GPLv2+" makes > people think "Project will be moving to GPLv3, RUN AWAY!" when all it > really means is "Project is GPLv2+, will evaluate the appropriateness of > later versions". This is not specific to 64-Bit ARM support, though. GPLv2+ has been there for very long. Aren't companies educated by now? (I am quite open to helping spread education, anyway) Amicalement, -- Albert. ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] U-boot for 64bit ARMv8
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:10:06AM -0700, Richard Schmitt wrote: > Is anyone considering porting/supporting uboot for ARMv8. ?Our initial > investigation of boot loader support for ARMv8 indicates that the only > boot loader currently being targeted is UEFI. ? > > The decisions we need to make are: > - Do we move to UEFI on ARM? > - Can we leverage someone else's enablement of ARMv8? > - Do we provide our own enablement of ARMv8? > > Any opinions? The general push from ARM Ltd is to use UEFI. I would strongly suspect that there are U-Boot forks that companies that have announced they are doing ARMv8 chips have something as a stop-gap until they have the functionality they want in uEFI. I am quite open to ARMv8 support being added to U-Boot and addressing the concerns companies may have. Sometimes it seems like "GPLv2+" makes people think "Project will be moving to GPLv3, RUN AWAY!" when all it really means is "Project is GPLv2+, will evaluate the appropriateness of later versions". -- Tom signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
