From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Mon Oct 3 09:01:38 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A16DAF284C for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 09:01:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arm@herveybayaustralia.com.au) Received: from mail.unitedinsong.com.au (mail.unitedinsong.com.au [150.101.178.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3B6D251 for ; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 09:01:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arm@herveybayaustralia.com.au) Received: from [192.168.0.177] (laptop3.herveybayaustralia.com.au [192.168.0.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.unitedinsong.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D925162090; Mon, 3 Oct 2016 19:01:32 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: u-boot efi option To: Emmanuel Vadot , Warner Losh References: <36160c78-9095-f716-8041-3eb7656642af@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20161002123700.662f2868688b4b32465395aa@bidouilliste.com> <20161003103247.78ff7596607755ce0f204648@bidouilliste.com> Cc: "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" From: Da Rock Message-ID: Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 19:01:30 +1000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161003103247.78ff7596607755ce0f204648@bidouilliste.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 09:01:38 -0000 A few points that I'd like clarification on: 1. I'm not having much success on rpi3 with any images, but I'm working on my own 64bit anyway. I'm also trying to get a handle on what the process of running the system on the rpi3 actually is as well. Fun... :) So the 512kb alignment, why is that an issue? Perhaps I'm a little foggy, but isn't that simply a case of partitioning correctly? 2. I should have mentioned this initially (which is why I was checking efi status to see if I was banging on for no reason), but I'm having trouble (still) compiling u-boot version that has the efi capability (2016.09) - can't find . I've tried with clang (x18 error) and gcc to no avail. I tried leveraging ports, but it is not exactly cooperating either (I'll have to try some more diags on that). Anyone have a clue on how to get past this? -I doesn't work, or linking to /usr/local/include. 3. My other query was on the EFI boot process on arm. As I understood, the u-boot is equivalent to boot0? So that means boot1 should then be in the fat partition? Is that what you mean by /efi/boot/bootarm.efi? Or doesn't it need to be? Apologies if I sound like a complete goose, but I'm still new to all things arm yet - but learning fast :) On 03/10/2016 18:32, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: > I've never had any problem with it (I know it doesn't really answer to > your question). > SuSe have switch to EFI (the main developer for U-Boot > EFI is from SuSe), OpenBSD too. > > The main problem right now for people to test is that the partition > on the arm images that we provide aren't aligned for it to work. > > I either need to fix the bug for non 512kb-aligned partition or > aligned them in the release scripts. > > Also I don't know which ports-tree re@ is using for snapshots. I think > that they use the latest quarterly for release and stable. > So we have to be carefull when we will switch the ports to UEFI. > > In the meantime don't hesitate to test with my patch. > > If you have the correct dtb in /dtb/ on the msdos part U-Boot will load > it. > For booting automatically just put boot1.efi as /efi/boot/bootarm.efi > > On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 16:06:37 -0600 > Warner Losh wrote: > >> How long do you think until this is mature enough we can cut over to it? >> There's issues with ubldr on newer u-boot version on some of the platforms >> we support. If we could cut over to this, that would be great. >> >> Warner >> >> On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Emmanuel Vadot wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I've commited every needed change on our side, for uboot side you will >>> need this patch : >>> https://people.freebsd.org/~manu/u-boot_201609_efi.diff >>> >>> The only drawback is that you will need to have your partition aligned >>> on 512kb boundaries on the mmc. >>> >>> I've successfully booted my beaglebone black and most of my Allwinner >>> boards with UEFI. >>> >>> Some part of the uboot patch have started to be upstreamed, for >>> the others I need to rework on some part before I upstream them. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> On Sun, 2 Oct 2016 19:56:54 +1000 >>> Da Rock wrote: >>> >>>> Has anyone tried this option yet? I've heard someone got it going for >>>> slack, but I thought it sounded like it might make it easier for running >>>> freebsd. >>>> >>>> I'm currently trying to build a more current u-boot to test it. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list >>>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm >>>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >>> >>> -- >>> Emmanuel Vadot >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-arm@freebsd.org mailing list >>> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >