|
Re: [PATCH v2] Base boot and runtime requirements - initial commit
Linux2022 name is going to change and its just a placeholder for now.
The platform specs builds upon the ISA level profiles A and M.
Linux2022 corresponds to A profile (RVA2022) where we are
Linux2022 name is going to change and its just a placeholder for now.
The platform specs builds upon the ISA level profiles A and M.
Linux2022 corresponds to A profile (RVA2022) where we are
|
By
Rahul Pathak
·
#757
·
|
|
Re: The clarifications to 4/19 meeting
Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@...> 於 2021年4月22日 週四 上午5:33寫道:
Don't get me wrong. I also agree with this point. I never thought to spec Linuxboot out in platform spec at this moment. I
Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@...> 於 2021年4月22日 週四 上午5:33寫道:
Don't get me wrong. I also agree with this point. I never thought to spec Linuxboot out in platform spec at this moment. I
|
By
Abner Chang
·
#756
·
|
|
Re: The clarifications to 4/19 meeting
Agreed. There are lot of moving pieces with LinuxBoot for RISC-V at
this moment. I would suggest to have the Linux-2022 version with UEFI.
We can include LinuxBoot in the future version as an
Agreed. There are lot of moving pieces with LinuxBoot for RISC-V at
this moment. I would suggest to have the Linux-2022 version with UEFI.
We can include LinuxBoot in the future version as an
|
By
atishp@...
·
#755
·
|
|
Re: The clarifications to 4/19 meeting
EDK II is available for RISC-V. So there is at least one compliant UEFI
implementation.
LinuxBoot might be used to boot into a Linux via kexec instead of UEFI
but kexec excludes running any other
EDK II is available for RISC-V. So there is at least one compliant UEFI
implementation.
LinuxBoot might be used to boot into a Linux via kexec instead of UEFI
but kexec excludes running any other
|
By
Heinrich Schuchardt
·
#754
·
|
|
Re: The clarifications to 4/19 meeting
I'm not sure I follow #1. How can I write an operating system for the Server2022 platform without knowing what firmware framework will be in use?
Jonathan
I'm not sure I follow #1. How can I write an operating system for the Server2022 platform without knowing what firmware framework will be in use?
Jonathan
|
By
Jonathan Behrens <behrensj@...>
·
#753
·
|
|
Re: Do we have owner for section 1.1.3 PLIC + CLINT
Hi Abner,
Just to clarify, PLIC + CLINT is still required for the base spec (section
1.13) since there are platforms out there.
ACPI is mandatory only for the server extension. For this class
Hi Abner,
Just to clarify, PLIC + CLINT is still required for the base spec (section
1.13) since there are platforms out there.
ACPI is mandatory only for the server extension. For this class
|
By
Sunil V L
·
#752
·
|
|
Re: Do we have owner for section 1.1.3 PLIC + CLINT
Yes, Sunil. I think you and your company is the owner of ACPI of APLIC for AIA. :)
PLIC could be the low-cost interrupt controller for the small platform (maybe not server) which also runs the ACPI
Yes, Sunil. I think you and your company is the owner of ACPI of APLIC for AIA. :)
PLIC could be the low-cost interrupt controller for the small platform (maybe not server) which also runs the ACPI
|
By
Abner Chang
·
#751
·
|
|
The clarifications to 4/19 meeting
Hi all,
I would like to give clarifications to some of the discussions in this week's meeting.
1. UEFI as the mandatory firmware.
I brought up this because it is not necessary to mention we must
Hi all,
I would like to give clarifications to some of the discussions in this week's meeting.
1. UEFI as the mandatory firmware.
I brought up this because it is not necessary to mention we must
|
By
Abner Chang
·
#750
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v2] Base boot and runtime requirements - initial commit
My reviews are inline below which is apart from the below recommendations if you don't think that is better.
We have Linux2022 as the base feature set for all kinds of platform, however, there are
My reviews are inline below which is apart from the below recommendations if you don't think that is better.
We have Linux2022 as the base feature set for all kinds of platform, however, there are
|
By
Abner Chang
·
#749
·
|
|
Re: Do we have owner for section 1.1.3 PLIC + CLINT
Hi Abner,
We are mandating APLIC for AIA for server extension with ACPI. So, legacy PLIC is not required for ACPI.
Thanks
Sunil
Hi Abner,
We are mandating APLIC for AIA for server extension with ACPI. So, legacy PLIC is not required for ACPI.
Thanks
Sunil
|
By
Sunil V L
·
#748
·
|
|
Re: Do we have owner for section 1.1.3 PLIC + CLINT
Hi Abner,
We don’t have an owner for the PLIC + CLINT section 1.1.3.
Please go ahead and send out a patch to the mailing list for review.
Regards
Kumar
Hi Abner,
We don’t have an owner for the PLIC + CLINT section 1.1.3.
Please go ahead and send out a patch to the mailing list for review.
Regards
Kumar
|
By
Kumar Sankaran
·
#747
·
|
|
Do we have owner for section 1.1.3 PLIC + CLINT
Hi all,
Do we currently have an owner for section 1.1.3 PLIC + CLINT?https://github.com/riscv/riscv-platform-specs/blob/main/riscv-platform-spec.adoc#113-interrupt-controller
If no, could I send the
Hi all,
Do we currently have an owner for section 1.1.3 PLIC + CLINT?https://github.com/riscv/riscv-platform-specs/blob/main/riscv-platform-spec.adoc#113-interrupt-controller
If no, could I send the
|
By
Abner Chang
·
#746
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] riscv-platform-spec: Initial server firmware requirements
Hi Abner,
Meeting recordings will be uploaded @ https://github.com/riscv/riscv-platform-specs/wiki.
Regards,
Sunil
Hi Abner,
Meeting recordings will be uploaded @ https://github.com/riscv/riscv-platform-specs/wiki.
Regards,
Sunil
|
By
Sunil V L
·
#745
·
|
|
[PATCH v2] Base boot and runtime requirements - initial commit
Initial changes for the Base Boot & Runtime requirements.
The sections which are currently in-progress are marked as TBD.
These changes can serve as the starting point and more details/changes
can be
Initial changes for the Base Boot & Runtime requirements.
The sections which are currently in-progress are marked as TBD.
These changes can serve as the starting point and more details/changes
can be
|
By
Rahul Pathak
·
#744
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] riscv-platform-spec: Initial server firmware requirements
Hi Anup and Sunil,
I think I missed the meeting this week. I thought it is Tuesday 11pm my time, however it is Monday actually. I was confused by the time zone. Sorry about that, I should get on
Hi Anup and Sunil,
I think I missed the meeting this week. I thought it is Tuesday 11pm my time, however it is Monday actually. I was confused by the time zone. Sorry about that, I should get on
|
By
Abner Chang
·
#743
·
|
|
Re: [PULL 0/3] Initial PR for the Embedded-2022 spec
Merged
Regards
Kumar
By
Kumar Sankaran
·
#742
·
|
|
Re: [PULL 0/3] Initial PR for the Embedded-2022 spec
Ping!
>
By
Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@...>
·
#741
·
|
|
Next platform meeting on Monday Apr 19 2021 8AM PST
Hi All,
The next platform meeting is scheduled on Monday Apr 19th 8AM PST.
Here are the details:
Agenda and minutes kept on the github wiki:
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-platform-specs/wiki
Here
Hi All,
The next platform meeting is scheduled on Monday Apr 19th 8AM PST.
Here are the details:
Agenda and minutes kept on the github wiki:
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-platform-specs/wiki
Here
|
By
Kumar Sankaran
·
#740
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] riscv-platform-spec: Initial server firmware requirements
Hi Anup, thanks for giving me this information. Yes, I did miss most of the meetings. Sorry about I am not able to join this meeting in the past.
Now I get more understanding of the organization of
Hi Anup, thanks for giving me this information. Yes, I did miss most of the meetings. Sorry about I am not able to join this meeting in the past.
Now I get more understanding of the organization of
|
By
Abner Chang
·
#739
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] riscv-platform-spec: Initial server firmware requirements
Hi Abner,
I think you missed lot of previous discussions/meetings.
The RISC-V platform spec will define various classes of platforms targeting different use-cases. This particular patch adds
Hi Abner,
I think you missed lot of previous discussions/meetings.
The RISC-V platform spec will define various classes of platforms targeting different use-cases. This particular patch adds
|
By
Anup Patel
·
#738
·
|