All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* BIOS vs Kernel
@ 2004-04-26 15:05 Lucas Silva
  2004-04-26 15:10 ` Norberto Bensa
  2004-04-26 15:56 ` Richard B. Johnson
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Lucas Silva @ 2004-04-26 15:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Before I start working on this I would like to find
out 
if it is possible or at least useful.

Is it feasible?
To create a BIOS that would help the kernel  (working
together).

What if the BIOS booted the PC in protected mode ,
 enabling the A20 (taking away all that backwards
support, so on),
 And then implement a realible interface.

Wouldn't that be faster?
Would the kernel be able to communicate to it?

Thanks Profetas


	
	
		
____________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: BIOS vs Kernel
  2004-04-26 15:05 BIOS vs Kernel Lucas Silva
@ 2004-04-26 15:10 ` Norberto Bensa
  2004-04-26 15:56 ` Richard B. Johnson
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Norberto Bensa @ 2004-04-26 15:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Lucas Silva; +Cc: linux-kernel

Lucas Silva wrote:
> Wouldn't that be faster?
> Would the kernel be able to communicate to it?


http://www.linuxbios.org/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: BIOS vs Kernel
  2004-04-26 15:05 BIOS vs Kernel Lucas Silva
  2004-04-26 15:10 ` Norberto Bensa
@ 2004-04-26 15:56 ` Richard B. Johnson
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Richard B. Johnson @ 2004-04-26 15:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Lucas Silva; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004, [iso-8859-1] Lucas Silva wrote:

> Before I start working on this I would like to find
> out
> if it is possible or at least useful.
>
> Is it feasible?
> To create a BIOS that would help the kernel  (working
> together).
>
> What if the BIOS booted the PC in protected mode ,
>  enabling the A20 (taking away all that backwards
> support, so on),
>  And then implement a realible interface.
>
> Wouldn't that be faster?
> Would the kernel be able to communicate to it?
>
> Thanks Profetas

The reason why the BIOS boots in 'real' mode is because there
are 'real' mode drivers provided by vendors that are added during
the POST routine. For instance a SCSI boot disk, or a LAN card
used to boot. If I were not for this, you could just boot in
protected-mode.

However, the BIOS does much, much, more than boot the machine!
Modern motherboards are very dumb as soon as the power is
applied. They are literly built by the BIOS. The final construction
(like how pins of electronic blobs are connected and the internal
guts of gate-arrays) is all done by the BIOS. It's not just a
matter of turning on chips like the old IBM manuals show.

So you need the BIOS to build the board. It starts the boot-sequence
in 'real' mode so that's what you have. FYI, the BIOS code has
already transitioned to and from 32-bit linear address space,
probably several times, during the POST routine. It's really
quite trivial. Whether or not the boot-code gets to 32-bit mode
right away or later on in the boot sequence is simply dependent
upon being able to complete the loading of the operating system
from the IPL device.


Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.26 on an i686 machine (5557.45 BogoMips).
            Note 96.31% of all statistics are fiction.



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2004-04-26 15:56 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-04-26 15:05 BIOS vs Kernel Lucas Silva
2004-04-26 15:10 ` Norberto Bensa
2004-04-26 15:56 ` Richard B. Johnson

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.