From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M5pgt-0004b0-Vc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 17 May 2009 19:22:47 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M5pgp-0004Yy-9S for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 17 May 2009 19:22:47 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59085 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M5pgp-0004Ys-5v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 17 May 2009 19:22:43 -0400 Received: from mail-gx0-f176.google.com ([209.85.217.176]:56175) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M5pgo-0002Jo-Uq for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 17 May 2009 19:22:43 -0400 Received: by gxk24 with SMTP id 24so8912119gxk.10 for ; Sun, 17 May 2009 16:22:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A109C3E.70604@codemonkey.ws> Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 18:22:38 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/4] Add GPL bios as a submodule References: <1242574141-18488-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <1242574141-18488-2-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com> <4A103084.2000508@redhat.com> <4A1031F4.4050401@us.ibm.com> <4A1039EB.4070906@redhat.com> <20090517175126.GA13426@shareable.org> <000001c9d71a$1a448730$4ecd9590$@com> <4A105358.80605@redhat.com> <000101c9d71e$8888fec0$999afc40$@com> In-Reply-To: <000101c9d71e$8888fec0$999afc40$@com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stanislav Cc: 'Anthony Liguori' , 'Dustin Kirkland' , 'Glauber Costa' , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, ron minnich , 'Avi Kivity' , 'Alex Graf' Stanislav wrote: >> What does Coreboot give us over seabios? >> > > You asking :) > > - It is much better maintained and sponsored by technology leaders (IBM, > AMD, Intel). > Take a look at who has been contributing to patches to the Bochs BIOS lately via QEMU :-) > Also as I understood some of bios stuff is patented, IBM bought these > patents and contributed them to Coreboot project. > Can you point me to specific information about this? > - I expect it will do support all recent stuff (new ACPI specs, UEFI and > etc) much faster than seabios. > I find this very unlikely. I don't think coreboot bothers with things like building ACPI tables. Why would it have to when it has a full Linux environment? Also, I find it very unlikely that it would bother support uefi interfaces. Maybe provide tiano core as a payload but we could always just use tiano core on top of QEMU directly. The problem with uefi is that you still need a CSM to support 99% of guests out there which means that you would still need a seabios module for tiano core. > - It is written for real modern hardware as well so it is validated on real > life as well. > It's a neat project and I think it's valuable to make it more easily used in QEMU, but I don't think it can replace our existing BIOS. I also don't think that that's its general mission statement either. I think its primary purpose is to eliminate all the legacy firmware junk and provide the quickest and most featureful environment for large clusters. >> Doesn't Coreboot use seabios for legacy OS? >> > > No idea ... > It does. Regards, Anthony Liguori