[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [coreboot] grub as coreboot payload
From: |
Robert Millan |
Subject: |
Re: [coreboot] grub as coreboot payload |
Date: |
Thu, 29 Oct 2009 21:39:01 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 09:58:30AM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 09:20:53PM +0100, Andreas B. Mundt wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> first, congratulations to the 1.97-release!
> >>
> >> I vainly tried to run the latest grub2 (Revision: 2663) as payload to
> >> coreboot (Revision: 4852) following the wikipage:
> >>
> >> http://grub.enbug.org/CoreBoot
> >>
> >> Is this page still up to date and does anybody use grub2 as payload
> >> successfully? How?
> >>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > It appears that since r4534 (move to Kconfig), Multiboot information is no
> > longer built in by default. You have to enable it in "System tables" /
> > "Generate Multiboot tables (for GRUB2)", then GRUB works fine (at least
> > on QEMU, which I just tested).
> >
> > Coreboot developers: would you consider enabling it again? The overhead
> > is minimal, and it would make this less confusing for users.
> >
> >
>
> Just checked, they're placed somewhere in the F segment.
>
> That means they'll be overwritten when SeaBIOS is used as payload. Not
> tragic, but is there a better place we can put them? or would this even
> be unhealthy or useless?
It is useless. It would become useful when SeaBIOS supports Multiboot.
But then, in order to get the main benefit of that (being loadable from
PC/BIOS + GRUB stack), it can't be linked in F segment anyway.
(Btw, I think a Multiboot SeaBIOS would be really interesting, specially
on non-BIOS x86 platforms like OFW or EFI)
--
Robert Millan
The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."