3 ms·
I was talking about non proprietary boards on the whole, not just the CPU. Also if everything is documented it's not a big deal to customize your bootloader to
by HidyBush 4y ago
I was talking about non proprietary boards on the whole, not just the CPU. Also if everything is documented it's not a big deal to customize your bootloader to do all the needed stuff. Of course standards would be very welcome, but at least you wouldn't need some arcane knowledge to get things running
- repiret 4y agoI don't think access to SoC documentation would have solved very many of the problems described in the article. The author still would have had to fiddle with device trees, secure firmware, u-boot, pxeboot, and getting a kernel with the right drivers built in. RISC-V also doesn't solve SoC documentation access. Most of Arm's CPU documentation is freely available, its all the other stuff SoC vendors bolt on that's hard to get access to. I don't see RISC-V changing that.
- snvzz 4y agoRefer to profiles, specifically OS-A Profile. Firmware interface is a solved problem (opensbi), so is enumeration (dtb).
- klelatti 4y agoCould you explain what you mean by ‘non proprietary’ boards. All open source software, open hardware. Would closed source RISC-V designs count?