u-boot efi option

[Mark Millard]

On 2016-Oct-3, at 2:01 AM, Da Rock <freebsd-arm at herveybayaustralia.com.au> wrote:

> 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 <sys/_types.h>. 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.

Looks to me like sys/_types.h normally exists:

# find /usr/include -name _types.h -print 
/usr/include/machine/_types.h
/usr/include/sys/_types.h

These two files are not the same by content and so are not equivalent so /usr/include/sys/_types.h is likely the right one. Using an armv6 stable/11 context the diff shows where the files came from in svn:

<  * $FreeBSD: stable/11/sys/arm/include/_types.h 301872 2016-06-13 16:48:27Z ian $
---
>  * $FreeBSD: stable/11/sys/sys/_types.h 299571 2016-05-12 21:18:17Z cem $

Note that /usr/local is not involved in the earlier /usr/include/sys/_types.h path.

[I've never tried to build u-boot 2016.09: the above is just a very generic note about where to find sys/_types.h .]

Without more details being presented it is not clear why /usr/include is not being used as a place to look for sys/_types.h in your context. (This wording presumes self-hosted builds instead of cross builds for the path details.)  That "not clear" status absent supporting details may well be true for folks familiar with building 2016.09 as well.

> 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 <imp at bsdimp.com> 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 <manu at bidouilliste.com> 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 <freebsd-arm at herveybayaustralia.com.au> 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.
. . .

===
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net



_______________________________________________
freebsd-arm at freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arm-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"