From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:33:39 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] U-boot for 64bit ARMv8 In-Reply-To: <1371042606.30144.YahooMailNeo@web5805.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1371042606.30144.YahooMailNeo@web5805.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20130612163339.GF26693@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 06:10:06AM -0700, Richard Schmitt wrote: > Is anyone considering porting/supporting uboot for ARMv8. ?Our initial > investigation of boot loader support for ARMv8 indicates that the only > boot loader currently being targeted is UEFI. ? > > The decisions we need to make are: > - Do we move to UEFI on ARM? > - Can we leverage someone else's enablement of ARMv8? > - Do we provide our own enablement of ARMv8? > > Any opinions? The general push from ARM Ltd is to use UEFI. I would strongly suspect that there are U-Boot forks that companies that have announced they are doing ARMv8 chips have something as a stop-gap until they have the functionality they want in uEFI. I am quite open to ARMv8 support being added to U-Boot and addressing the concerns companies may have. Sometimes it seems like "GPLv2+" makes people think "Project will be moving to GPLv3, RUN AWAY!" when all it really means is "Project is GPLv2+, will evaluate the appropriateness of later versions". -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: