On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 08:41:11PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >
> > multiboot2 protocol requires some more changes. However, about 80% of code
> > is ready. In this case Xen and modules are loaded by GRUB2 itself. It means
> > that all images could be placed on any filesystem recognized
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 08:41:11PM +, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
multiboot2 protocol requires some more changes. However, about 80% of code
is ready. In this case Xen and modules are loaded by GRUB2 itself. It means
that all images could be placed on any filesystem recognized by GRUB2.
On Wed, 30 Oct 2013, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is a short summary of our discussion. It looks
> that we have two choices right now:
> - chainloader,
> - multiboot2 protocol.
>
> chainloader solution could be implemented quite easily. Some code should be
> added for command line
On Wed, 30 Oct 2013, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,
Here is a short summary of our discussion. It looks
that we have two choices right now:
- chainloader,
- multiboot2 protocol.
chainloader solution could be implemented quite easily. Some code should be
added for command line parsing.
On 30.10.2013 12:19, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> Hi,
> multiboot2 protocol requires some more changes. However, about 80% of code
> is ready. In this case Xen and modules are loaded by GRUB2 itself. It means
> that all images could be placed on any filesystem recognized by GRUB2. Options
> for Xen and
Hi,
Here is a short summary of our discussion. It looks
that we have two choices right now:
- chainloader,
- multiboot2 protocol.
chainloader solution could be implemented quite easily. Some code should be
added for command line parsing. However, all arguments for Xen itself and
modules must
Hi,
Here is a short summary of our discussion. It looks
that we have two choices right now:
- chainloader,
- multiboot2 protocol.
chainloader solution could be implemented quite easily. Some code should be
added for command line parsing. However, all arguments for Xen itself and
modules must
On 30.10.2013 12:19, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,
multiboot2 protocol requires some more changes. However, about 80% of code
is ready. In this case Xen and modules are loaded by GRUB2 itself. It means
that all images could be placed on any filesystem recognized by GRUB2. Options
for Xen and
>>> On 28.10.13 at 19:01, Vladimir 'f-coder/phcoder'
>>> Serbinenko wrote:
Will a multiboot2 tag with whole EFI memory map solve your problem?
>>> I added such a tag in documentation and wrote a patch for it (attached).
>>> Awaiting for someone to test it to commit
>>
>> Great! I think from
On 28.10.13 at 19:01, Vladimir 'f-coder/phcoder'
Serbinenkophco...@gmail.com wrote:
Will a multiboot2 tag with whole EFI memory map solve your problem?
I added such a tag in documentation and wrote a patch for it (attached).
Awaiting for someone to test it to commit
Great! I think from
Hi,
Quoting Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, who wrote the following on Mon, 28 Oct 2013:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:54:44AM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I
>>> Will a multiboot2 tag with whole EFI memory map solve your problem?
>> I added such a tag in documentation and wrote a patch for it (attached).
>> Awaiting for someone to test it to commit
>
> Great! I think from Xen perspective we first need to have Xen be able
> to understand multiboot2 -
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:54:44AM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> > Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
> > On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
>
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:54:44AM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,
During work
Will a multiboot2 tag with whole EFI memory map solve your problem?
I added such a tag in documentation and wrote a patch for it (attached).
Awaiting for someone to test it to commit
Great! I think from Xen perspective we first need to have Xen be able
to understand multiboot2 - that is
Hi,
Quoting Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk, who wrote the following on Mon, 28 Oct 2013:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:54:44AM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I
>>> Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko 10/23/13 7:02 PM
>>> >>>
>> GrUB - which iiuc stays in memory
>> after transferring control - could export its file system support to its
>> descendants).
>
>Xen shouldn't need to load any file after multiboot2 entry point. The
>needed files would already
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenkophco...@gmail.com 10/23/13 7:02 PM
GrUB - which iiuc stays in memory
after transferring control - could export its file system support to its
descendants).
Xen shouldn't need to load any file after multiboot2 entry point. The
needed files would already
В Wed, 23 Oct 2013 16:07:38 +0200
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
> > - Do the signature verification (hand-waving which one - probably both).
> Can someone throw me the link on the EFI signature specification? Can't
> really find it now.
It is in UEFI specs, specifically chapter
> GrUB - which iiuc stays in memory
> after transferring control - could export its file system support to its
> descendants).
Xen shouldn't need to load any file after multiboot2 entry point. The
needed files would already be in memory with pointers to them passed.
If you insist on being able to
>>> Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk 10/23/13 3:15 PM >>>
>On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 09:32:30AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> Am I correct that xen.efi today can be loaded from grub today using the
>> chainload command? Whereupon it will parse the xen.cfg and load the dom0
>> kernel and load things from FAT
>>> Ian Campbell 10/23/13 10:32 AM >>>
>The second (standard PE/COFF entry point) can be launched using the UEFI
>chainloader call. AIUI this should work with xen.efi today. There are
>some limitations however, firstly there is no way to pass additional
>blobs and so the launched image must load
On 23.10.2013 15:13, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> - not make an ExitBootServices call - which it does right now in the Solaris
>GRUB2 case and in the Fedora GRUB2 case.
What about having a special tag in multiboot2 file header "RKEBSIHE":
"request to keep EFI boot services" and then
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 09:32:30AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 12:26 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > It can (at least in Linux). There are two entry points in the Linux kernel
> > and - one when it is launched from 'linuxefi' (See efi_stub_entry in
> >
On 23.10.2013 09:05, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> Thanks. Could you send me a pointer to current multiboot2 protocol docs?
It's managed as "multiboot2" branch in our repo:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git
Note: we're in process of moving from bzr to git which may cause the
link to change.
On 23.10.2013 09:43, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:16:24PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
> Serbinenko wrote:
>> Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
>> On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> During work on multiboot2
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 12:26 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> It can (at least in Linux). There are two entry points in the Linux kernel
> and - one when it is launched from 'linuxefi' (See efi_stub_entry in
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.S), the other when it is launched
> from an EFI
> On Oct 23, 2013, at 12:05 AM, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:54:44AM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
>> Serbinenko wrote:
>>> On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
>>> Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 05:21:15PM +, Maliszewski, Richard L wrote:
> The latter. The code I was looking at definitely has the linuxefi
> directive. FWIW, if you install FC18/19 on an EFI system, the grub2
> config file uses the linuxefi and companion initrd directives for launch.
>
>
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:16:24PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
> On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it was discovered
> >
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:54:44AM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> > Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
> > On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
>
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 09:42:52AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:59:33AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 22.10.13 at 11:45, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:31 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >> >>> On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell wrote:
2013/10/23 Michael Chang :
> 2013/10/23 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk :
>> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:25:39PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:43 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>> >
>>> > And looking at bit deeper in the x86/linux boot spec:
>>> >
>>> > EFI HANDOVER
2013/10/23 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk :
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:25:39PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:43 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>> >
>> > And looking at bit deeper in the x86/linux boot spec:
>> >
>> > EFI HANDOVER PROTOCOL
>> >
>> > This protocol
2013/10/23 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:25:39PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:43 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
And looking at bit deeper in the x86/linux boot spec:
EFI HANDOVER PROTOCOL
This protocol
2013/10/23 Michael Chang mch...@suse.com:
2013/10/23 Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:25:39PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:43 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
And looking at bit deeper in the x86/linux boot spec:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 09:42:52AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:59:33AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.10.13 at 11:45, Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:31 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:54:44AM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,
During work
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:16:24PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,
During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it was discovered
that
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 05:21:15PM +, Maliszewski, Richard L wrote:
The latter. The code I was looking at definitely has the linuxefi
directive. FWIW, if you install FC18/19 on an EFI system, the grub2
config file uses the linuxefi and companion initrd directives for launch.
--Richard
On Oct 23, 2013, at 12:05 AM, Daniel Kiper daniel.ki...@oracle.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:54:44AM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
Serbinenko wrote:
On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 12:26 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
It can (at least in Linux). There are two entry points in the Linux kernel
and - one when it is launched from 'linuxefi' (See efi_stub_entry in
arch/x86/boot/compressed/head_64.S), the other when it is launched
from an EFI shell
On 23.10.2013 09:43, Daniel Kiper wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:16:24PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder'
Serbinenko wrote:
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,
During work on multiboot2 protocol
On 23.10.2013 09:05, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Thanks. Could you send me a pointer to current multiboot2 protocol docs?
It's managed as multiboot2 branch in our repo:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/grub.git
Note: we're in process of moving from bzr to git which may cause the
link to change.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 09:32:30AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 12:26 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
It can (at least in Linux). There are two entry points in the Linux kernel
and - one when it is launched from 'linuxefi' (See efi_stub_entry in
On 23.10.2013 15:13, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
- not make an ExitBootServices call - which it does right now in the Solaris
GRUB2 case and in the Fedora GRUB2 case.
What about having a special tag in multiboot2 file header RKEBSIHE:
request to keep EFI boot services and then bootloader
Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com 10/23/13 10:32 AM
The second (standard PE/COFF entry point) can be launched using the UEFI
chainloader call. AIUI this should work with xen.efi today. There are
some limitations however, firstly there is no way to pass additional
blobs and so the launched
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com 10/23/13 3:15 PM
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 09:32:30AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
Am I correct that xen.efi today can be loaded from grub today using the
chainload command? Whereupon it will parse the xen.cfg and load the dom0
kernel and load things
GrUB - which iiuc stays in memory
after transferring control - could export its file system support to its
descendants).
Xen shouldn't need to load any file after multiboot2 entry point. The
needed files would already be in memory with pointers to them passed.
If you insist on being able to
В Wed, 23 Oct 2013 16:07:38 +0200
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko phco...@gmail.com пишет:
- Do the signature verification (hand-waving which one - probably both).
Can someone throw me the link on the EFI signature specification? Can't
really find it now.
It is in UEFI specs,
The latter. The code I was looking at definitely has the linuxefi
directive. FWIW, if you install FC18/19 on an EFI system, the grub2
config file uses the linuxefi and companion initrd directives for launch.
--Richard
On 10/22/13 9:51 AM, "Daniel Kiper" wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at
On 22.10.2013 19:12, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> В Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:16:24 +0200
> Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
>
>> GRUB has generic support for signing kernels/modules/whatsoever using
>> GnuPG signatures. You'd just have to ship xen.sig and kernel.sig. This
>> method doesn't
В Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:16:24 +0200
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko пишет:
> GRUB has generic support for signing kernels/modules/whatsoever using
> GnuPG signatures. You'd just have to ship xen.sig and kernel.sig. This
> method doesn't have any controversy associated with EFI stuff but at
>
On 22.10.2013 18:51, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 04:36:04PM +, Maliszewski, Richard L wrote:
>> I may be off-base, but when I was wading through the grub2 code earlier
>> this year, it looked to me like it was going to refuse to launch anything
>> via MB1 or MB2 if the
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 04:36:04PM +, Maliszewski, Richard L wrote:
> I may be off-base, but when I was wading through the grub2 code earlier
> this year, it looked to me like it was going to refuse to launch anything
> via MB1 or MB2 if the current state was a secure boot launch.
Are you
> > Are you (going to be) in Edinburgh? Matthew was just explaining a bunch
> > of this stuff to me, it might be useful for you to get it from the
> > horses mouth instead of laundered through my brain (which is a bit
> > addled afterwards ;-)).
>
> Sadly no. However, if it is possible/needed I
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:25:39PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:43 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >
> > And looking at bit deeper in the x86/linux boot spec:
> >
> > EFI HANDOVER PROTOCOL
> >
> >
I may be off-base, but when I was wading through the grub2 code earlier
this year, it looked to me like it was going to refuse to launch anything
via MB1 or MB2 if the current state was a secure boot launch.
--Richard
On 10/22/13 9:24 AM, "Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko"
wrote:
>On
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 05:39:24PM +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> On 22.10.2013 16:51, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > If you use 'linux' module, it will call ExitBootService.
> > If you use 'multiboot' module, it will call ExitBootService too.
> >
> > So if you don't
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 18:25 +0200, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
wrote:
> On 22.10.2013 18:14, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> >> > Are you (going to be) in Edinburgh? Matthew was just explaining a bunch
> >> > of this stuff to me, it might be useful for you to get it from the
> >> > horses mouth
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 12:24 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 04:21:47PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:57 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > That 'that' is a standard PE/COFF image? Could you please point me
> > > to the code that does
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 04:22:38PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 15:24 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:09 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >
> > > So it can be booted the same way as xen.efi. But my understanding is
> > > that folks prefer a
On 22.10.2013 18:14, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>> > Are you (going to be) in Edinburgh? Matthew was just explaining a bunch
>> > of this stuff to me, it might be useful for you to get it from the
>> > horses mouth instead of laundered through my brain (which is a bit
>> > addled afterwards ;-)).
What
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 04:21:47PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:57 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > That 'that' is a standard PE/COFF image? Could you please point me
> > to the code that does that in GRUB2?
>
> As I said earlier in the thread, it's a patch which
On 22.10.2013 18:01, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:42:42PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 16:32 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>>
>>> There are two problems with this:
>>>
>>> 1) The kernel will only boot if it's signed with a key in db, not a key
>>> in
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 05:08:03PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 18:01 +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:42:42PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 16:32 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > >
> > > > There are two problems with
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 18:01 +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:42:42PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 16:32 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > >
> > > There are two problems with this:
> > >
> > > 1) The kernel will only boot if it's signed with a key
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:42:42PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 16:32 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > There are two problems with this:
> >
> > 1) The kernel will only boot if it's signed with a key in db, not a key
> > in MOK.
> > 2) grub will read the kernel, but
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 16:32 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> There are two problems with this:
>
> 1) The kernel will only boot if it's signed with a key in db, not a key
> in MOK.
> 2) grub will read the kernel, but the kernel will have to read the
> initramfs using EFI calls. That means
On 22.10.2013 16:51, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> If you use 'linux' module, it will call ExitBootService.
> If you use 'multiboot' module, it will call ExitBootService too.
>
> So if you don't want to the module to call 'grub_efi_finish_boot_services'
> you need to use 'linuxefi' :-)
That's a
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:51:40AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> And I still haven't found the module that can launch any PE/COFF
> image from GRUB2. Maybe that is a myth.
"chainload" will do this. In fact, it doesn't do much:
static grub_err_t
grub_chainloader_boot (void)
{
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:25:39PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> Oh, ignore that. You want the *actual* PE executable entry point, as it
> would get invoked by a real UEFI firmware.
There are two problems with this:
1) The kernel will only boot if it's signed with a key in db, not a key
in
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:43 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
> And looking at bit deeper in the x86/linux boot spec:
>
> EFI HANDOVER PROTOCOL
>
>
>
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 14:18 +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
> > I wonder why Linux can't make the EFI calls to fetch them itself?
>
> It can. It does. It prefers to. This is what the "EFI boot stub" is all about.
Good, this is what I thought, glad to see I'm not talking out my behind
for once!
>
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 15:24 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:09 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
> > So it can be booted the same way as xen.efi. But my understanding is
> > that folks prefer a bootloader instead of loading the bzImage in an
> > NVRAM of a platform with
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:57 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> That 'that' is a standard PE/COFF image? Could you please point me
> to the code that does that in GRUB2?
As I said earlier in the thread, it's a patch which is being carried by
all the distros. It is not in upstream grub.
For
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 03:24:28PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:09 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
> > So it can be booted the same way as xen.efi. But my understanding is
> > that folks prefer a bootloader instead of loading the bzImage in an
> > NVRAM of a
>>> On 22.10.13 at 16:51, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> And I still haven't found the module that can launch any PE/COFF
> image from GRUB2. Maybe that is a myth.
I can't exclude that this is a custom a patch as the linuxefi support.
Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 02:18:52PM +, Woodhouse, David wrote:
>
> > I wonder why Linux can't make the EFI calls to fetch them itself?
>
> It can. It does. It prefers to. This is what the "EFI boot stub" is all
> about. But grub2 is crack-inspired and likes to do all kinds of crap that it
>
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 09:42:52AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:59:33AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 22.10.13 at 11:45, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:31 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >> >>> On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:09 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> So it can be booted the same way as xen.efi. But my understanding is
> that folks prefer a bootloader instead of loading the bzImage in an
> NVRAM of a platform with pre-set parameters. Hence that mechanism
> is not used by the
efano.stabell...@eu.citrix.com,grub-de...@gnu.org,"Woodhouse,
David" ,"Maliszewski, Richard L"
,xen-de...@lists.xen.org,boris.ostrov...@oracle.com,Daniel
Kiper ,Peter Jones
,linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,k...@xen.org
Subject: Re: EFI and multiboot2 devlopment work for Xen
On Tue, 2013-10-22
>>> On 22.10.13 at 15:53, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 09:42 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
>> Looking at the Fedora GRUB2 source, the 'struct linux_kernel_header' is
> defined
>> in the linux/Documentation/x86/boot.txt and hpa is pretty strict
>> about making it backwards
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 02:53:05PM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 09:42 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
> > Looking at the Fedora GRUB2 source, the 'struct linux_kernel_header' is
> > defined
> > in the linux/Documentation/x86/boot.txt and hpa is pretty strict
> > about
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 09:42 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> Looking at the Fedora GRUB2 source, the 'struct linux_kernel_header' is
> defined
> in the linux/Documentation/x86/boot.txt and hpa is pretty strict
> about making it backwards compatible. It also seems to support Xen!
>
>
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 10:59:33AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 22.10.13 at 11:45, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:31 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell wrote:
> >> > AIUI "efilinux" is somewhat badly named and does not use the Linux Boot
>>> On 22.10.13 at 11:45, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:31 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> > AIUI "efilinux" is somewhat badly named and does not use the Linux Boot
>> > Protocol (i.e. the (b)zImage stuff with real mode entry point)
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:31 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > AIUI "efilinux" is somewhat badly named and does not use the Linux Boot
> > Protocol (i.e. the (b)zImage stuff with real mode entry point) either.
> > It actually loads and executes the
>>> On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell wrote:
> AIUI "efilinux" is somewhat badly named and does not use the Linux Boot
> Protocol (i.e. the (b)zImage stuff with real mode entry point) either.
> It actually loads and executes the kernel binary as a PE/COFF executable
> (the native UEFI binary
On Mon, 2013-10-21 at 20:57 +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 09:54:38AM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 02:57:56PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it was discovered
> > > that memory map
On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
> On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it was discovered
>> that memory map passed
>>> On 21.10.13 at 20:46, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 03:37:21PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 21.10.13 at 16:23, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
>> >>> wrote:
>> > However my understanding is that the general distro approach is
>> > to use GRUB2 and I think we want to follow the
>>> On 21.10.13 at 20:39, Daniel Kiper wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 02:36:38PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 21.10.13 at 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
>> > Separate multiboot2efi module should be established. It should verify
>> > system
>> > kernel and all loaded modules using shim on
On 21.10.13 at 20:39, Daniel Kiper daniel.ki...@oracle.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 02:36:38PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 21.10.13 at 14:57, Daniel Kiper daniel.ki...@oracle.com wrote:
Separate multiboot2efi module should be established. It should verify
system
kernel and all
On 21.10.13 at 20:46, Daniel Kiper daniel.ki...@oracle.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 03:37:21PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 21.10.13 at 16:23, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com
wrote:
However my understanding is that the general distro approach is
to use GRUB2 and I
On 21.10.2013 23:16, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
Mail is big, I think I got your essential points but I didn't read it whole.
On 21.10.2013 14:57, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,
During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it was discovered
that memory map passed via relevant
On Mon, 2013-10-21 at 20:57 +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 09:54:38AM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 02:57:56PM +0200, Daniel Kiper wrote:
Hi,
During work on multiboot2 protocol support for Xen it was discovered
that memory map passed via
On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com wrote:
AIUI efilinux is somewhat badly named and does not use the Linux Boot
Protocol (i.e. the (b)zImage stuff with real mode entry point) either.
It actually loads and executes the kernel binary as a PE/COFF executable
(the native
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:31 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com wrote:
AIUI efilinux is somewhat badly named and does not use the Linux Boot
Protocol (i.e. the (b)zImage stuff with real mode entry point) either.
It actually loads and
On 22.10.13 at 11:45, Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com wrote:
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 10:31 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 22.10.13 at 11:26, Ian Campbell ian.campb...@citrix.com wrote:
AIUI efilinux is somewhat badly named and does not use the Linux Boot
Protocol (i.e. the (b)zImage stuff
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
