[ACTIVITY] Meeting minutes from 13Oct2011
plagnioj at jcrosoft.com
Tue Oct 18 04:44:51 UTC 2011
On 22:30 Mon 17 Oct , Grant Likely wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Ilias Biris <ilias.biris at linaro.org> wrote:
> > Hi folks
> > https://wiki.linaro.org/OfficeofCTO/BootArchitecture/2011-10-13 has the
> > meeting minutes from yesterday's discussion. I have summarised below the
> > highlights and Actions recorded in the etherpad.
> Hi Ilias,
> Thanks for getting these out.
> > -----
> > = Highlights =
> > We discussed the short term pain points, which should be possible to
> > address via some engineering work - priorities were discussed here is
> > where the discussion was left at the end of the meeting
> > RANKING
> > - Rob's top two: 1) zImage support in u-boot. 2) How does the OS change
> > which kernel gets booted.
> > - Olivier: 1) Get grub working with u-boot - get booting from a GPT
> > partition 2) zImage update process 3) GPT support
> > - Jean-Christophe: 1) Investigate and begin using FIT image format 2)
> > multiplatform kernel images 3) signed images - kernel, initrd, dtb
> > - Grant: 1) grub or grub config file on u-boot 2) Start using GPT support
> In the absence of a lot of follow-up discussion I'm going to propose
> the following ranking and set of priorities for short term pain-point
> resolution that can be presented to the TSC. I'll leave this on the
> table for a day or so to collect final comments before I pass this on
> to David. These are the items that I think are most valuable in
> preparing for "standard architecture" ARM machines with the
> expectation that distributions will be using separate kernel & initrd
> images, and boot loader configuration files for selecting which kernel
> to boot. I also think this list captures the items that there was
> consensus about on Thursday.
> 1) Add "grub" or "lilo" mode to u-boot for booting from disk
> 1a) add minimal grub-like config file support to u-boot when booting from disk
> 1b) When booting from disk, make u-boot use GPT boot partition to
> determine where to load config file and images
> - I've grouped 1a & 1b together because they don't have much value separately.
I propose a format
> 2) Implement rudimentary boot menu support in u-boot (if it doesn't
> already exist). Doesn't need to be graphical, but at least have a
> default boot with a list of other boot options.
take a llok on Barebox
The format I propose will use the menu implemetation to display the boot
I really think we can have barebox on server very quicly as barebox already
support the disk device and menu.
And if need I've an implementation of the framebuffer console
> 3) Investigate implementing signed images a la secure boot. Need to
> investigate existing secure boot formats and policies so we don't do
> something gratuitously different.
> I don't disagree with the FIT image topics, but I'm not including them
> in this list of recommendations because they don't have much bearing
> on the task of working out ARM server infrastructure.
They are usefull to have in one image multple kernel/dtb/initrd
More information about the boot-architecture