On 22:30 Mon 17 Oct , Grant Likely wrote:
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Ilias Biris ilias.biris@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.
- 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
- 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 choice
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
- 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
Best Regards, J.