From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.71) id 1a5zVF-0004HX-3p for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:23:09 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41669) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a5zVC-0004Ge-E0 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:23:07 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a5zV8-00049V-DP for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:23:06 -0500 Received: from mail-lb0-x22c.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c04::22c]:36190) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a5zV8-00049H-5w for grub-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 12:23:02 -0500 Received: by lbblt2 with SMTP id lt2so70826553lbb.3 for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 09:23:01 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UvcvNlMbMIM4e7KXHtdX1b4Qvfyg7ZdbEA7H8r6nwZ8=; b=sM8HSaJKByUOB4T+ul+aZ/+F2g8EH2sLiJTOiM3QgpQd9Q5esCPmsNDc9BgUDqN4kE lX/macT2xPTk05tj/Q58LPCQTE4klTTSdXHApNk5JzS1ExnuS8cEHVASGum4WJ+nPATN BFPcvpyrmJeq+k/naykcezshVknQum+NGV9oKrQRLRq5KUVZ+lmgML2a8fIG6LfllGa1 TlJklyb789hbCBvO3Ry0pxVCqf2lycztgGVsNapjKxxf8Gd8FSTXgeoAk65+sZLQyXVk MiuxbD+fq6uSVxXs2DQtG9gAc7u0Awslk9qfAJnPymPPfuYKdYZ1aJrIQkDZPGgPvUEb xVFw== X-Received: by 10.112.145.72 with SMTP id ss8mr5224460lbb.54.1449508981059; Mon, 07 Dec 2015 09:23:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.41] (ppp91-76-25-247.pppoe.mtu-net.ru. [91.76.25.247]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k189sm4979831lfd.12.2015.12.07.09.22.59 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Mon, 07 Dec 2015 09:23:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: State of ARM port To: Leif Lindholm References: <565AACBA.7050503@gmail.com> <20151207170256.GS1108@bivouac.eciton.net> From: Andrei Borzenkov X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <5665C073.3090901@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 20:22:59 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20151207170256.GS1108@bivouac.eciton.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4010:c04::22c Cc: The development of GNU GRUB X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GNU GRUB List-Id: The development of GNU GRUB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 17:23:07 -0000 07.12.2015 20:02, Leif Lindholm пишет: > Hi Andrei, > > Sorry, have been off on holiday. > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 10:43:54AM +0300, Andrei Borzenkov wrote: >> It seems that distributions tend to focus on native U-Boot support for >> extlinux-like configuration and direct loading of Linux kernel/FDT. >> Recently it came up for openSUSE, reasons were named > > Debian don't, and I'm not sure I've heard of any others moving that > direction, so I don't know if it can be called a trend. > >> 1. upstream U-Boot prefers extlinux for loading, CONFIG_API is >> considered edge case, deprecated. They do not consider GRUB valid reason >> to maintain it :) > > Do you have any references to this? > (Not questioning it, sounds likely, but would like to read through > any existing discussions.) > https://www.marc.info/?l=u-boot&m=140881607132099&w=2 http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-October/229915.html (full thread) https://github.com/openSUSE/perl-bootloader/pull/81#issuecomment-158543744 >> 2. GRUB requires patching for each board to set valid link address > > Yeah :( > >> 3. some general issues on specific boards > > Hmm? > >> 1 requires active commitment from U-Boot community, apparently it is >> lacking. To properly fix 2 we need relocation support in U-Boot; which >> again returns us to "GRUB not being interesting to U-Boot community" :) > > No, 2 would be totally fixable in GRUB. It would just take someone > actually making the grub kernel position independent. And I haven't > managed to find the time in the past two years... > >> 3 depends on motivation to debug and fix issues; as long as GRUB is not >> considered there is none. >> >> So what should we do with this port? > > Unsure. > > I have had people start asking me for the arm64 variant, but if the arm64 EFI grub port is used as standard in openSUSE. Only U-Boot platforms are moving away. Or do you mean arm64 U-Boot? > U-Boot community is actively disintirested in providing an API to hook > into, this may not make sense. > > Regards, > > Leif >