4 ms·

libreboot is a BIOS/firmware replacement, and works only on x86 and ARM. The chip in this article is a microcontroller, not a full-on application processor. Se

by sspiff 11y ago

libreboot is a BIOS/firmware replacement, and works only on x86 and ARM. The chip in this article is a microcontroller, not a full-on application processor. Seems like libreboot would be senseless on a platform such as this. I don't really understand the connection, please explain what you mean?

chris_wot 11y ago
The only connection is my absolutely dreadful understanding of electronics in general :-)
pgeorgi 11y ago
coreboot (that libreboot is built upon) also supports MIPS, RISC-V, and has ongoing development for Power8. More platforms can certainly be supported. This is relevant in this case because the chip in question is also RISC-V based...
- chris_wot 11y ago
  As I said to the parent poster, my knowledge of electronics is atrocious - but does this mean that the chip could be used as a BIOS replacement? If not, then I guess I start to wonder what prevents someone from designing such a chip - there seems to be a demand. Almost more demand than a CPU!
  - pgeorgi 11y ago
    The issues people find in contemporary systems are inside the CPU or chipset (and the distinction between these two is blurring more and more due to increasing levels of integration). The "BIOS" (or rather: firmware in general; BIOS being one specification of a firmware interface) is software, just highly specific for the device in question and stored in a flash chip that is available to the CPU from the start. For firmware, there are alternatives such as coreboot, but they're limited by what the CPU/chipset come with. If they feature a coprocessor that runs before the CPU even starts (and in fact starts the CPU), has full access to all kinds of hardware (eg. RAM), and that is only running code signed by the chip's vendor, the CPU firmware can't outsmart that. And so the Intel Management Engine, AMD's Platform Security Processor and similar less than brilliant functions exist in contemporary hardware, and the only chance to get rid of them is to evaluate other platforms (and that means CPUs) that ship without such extras. Which is what Timothy (author of that email) is doing. On the upside, a new architecture isn't as frightening when you're shopping for fully open source platforms, since stuff is (for the most part) just a recompile away.

by sspiff 11y ago

chris_wot 11y ago

The only connection is my absolutely dreadful understanding of electronics in general :-)

pgeorgi 11y ago

coreboot (that libreboot is built upon) also supports MIPS, RISC-V, and has ongoing development for Power8. More platforms can certainly be supported. This is relevant in this case because the chip in question is also RISC-V based...

chris_wot 11y ago
As I said to the parent poster, my knowledge of electronics is atrocious - but does this mean that the chip could be used as a BIOS replacement? If not, then I guess I start to wonder what prevents someone from designing such a chip - there seems to be a demand. Almost more demand than a CPU!
- pgeorgi 11y ago
  The issues people find in contemporary systems are inside the CPU or chipset (and the distinction between these two is blurring more and more due to increasing levels of integration). The "BIOS" (or rather: firmware in general; BIOS being one specification of a firmware interface) is software, just highly specific for the device in question and stored in a flash chip that is available to the CPU from the start. For firmware, there are alternatives such as coreboot, but they're limited by what the CPU/chipset come with. If they feature a coprocessor that runs before the CPU even starts (and in fact starts the CPU), has full access to all kinds of hardware (eg. RAM), and that is only running code signed by the chip's vendor, the CPU firmware can't outsmart that. And so the Intel Management Engine, AMD's Platform Security Processor and similar less than brilliant functions exist in contemporary hardware, and the only chance to get rid of them is to evaluate other platforms (and that means CPUs) that ship without such extras. Which is what Timothy (author of that email) is doing. On the upside, a new architecture isn't as frightening when you're shopping for fully open source platforms, since stuff is (for the most part) just a recompile away.