On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 05:46:43PM -0300, Mitchell Horne wrote:
On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 1:52 PM Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 06:34:11PM -0400, mhorne@FreeBSD.org wrote:
From: Mitchell Horne mhorne@FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD makes use of u-boot's CONFIG_API to provide a version of its standard bootloader for embedded architectures. This series adds the necessary support for the RISC-V architecture, along with some small fixes to the API demo program for 64-bit systems.
Adding in the RISC-V maintainer and EFI maintainer. I thought the intention was for OSes to use the EFI loader here, even for "embedded" ? Thanks!
Hi Tom,
You are right, EFI is preferred. FreeBSD's loader has two implementations on arm: one that is an EFI application, and one based on this u-boot API (known as "ubldr"). ubldr precedes the EFI implementation by a few years.
For RISC-V my intention is also to implement both versions, and ubldr was simpler on FreeBSD's side, so I chose to do that first. Do you think this series is still worth pursuing if u-boot is going the way of EFI?
In my mind at least, the EFI interface is preferred as it's a defined external standard interface. If the architecture maintainers want to support both the U-Boot API and EFI on RISC-V, I don't object. But one of the intentions is to have there be less work for OS folks to have to do for example. So that you found this a good first step for your use case means perhaps we need to continue to have the U-Boot API method be around (not that we had planned any sort of removal). Thanks!