Date
1 - 4 of 4
Platform Spec Chapters and Owners
|
Hi All, As we spoke during the meeting today, below are the chapters that we need owners for. We are looking for volunteers to own and write each of these chapters. Please review and provide feedback regarding ownership of the specific chapters preferably this week if possible. Also, the goal in the platform spec would be to cross reference an item from profiles or a different arch spec if one exists for a particular feature. For example, in the Architecture section for Linux-2022, we would be referring to the RVA22 profile. So all we need here is to point to the RVA22 spec. Similarly, the interrupt section in the platform spec can point to the AIA spec.
Below are the sections as we discussed.
Linux-2022 Base
U-Boot UEFI
Device Tree ACPI
Server Extension
Embedded-2022 Base
PMP Extension
RVM-SIS Extension
Agenda and minutes kept on the github wiki: https://github.com/riscv/riscv-platform-specs/wiki
Here are the slides:
The meeting recording is here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1te2iNY2WN3pKSsMvIEMQdFIw1sXkcN5K/view?usp=sharing
Regards Kumar |
|
|
|
On 09.03.21 18:31, Kumar Sankaran wrote:
Hi Heinrich,Hello Kumar, OpenSBI can collaborate both with both EDK II and U-Boot. For the Linux platform this should not make a difference as long as the UEFI firmware implementation and the SBI implementation are compliant. The relevant question is which part of UEFI has to be implemented. ARM has driven the definition of two profiles: EBBR for embedded boards https://github.com/ARM-software/ebbr and SBBR for servers https://static.docs.arm.com/den0044/12/Server_Base_Boot_Requirements-1.2.pdf. U-Boot only targets the EBBR specification while EDK II is the UEFI reference implementation and complies to the SBBR. My idea is that the envisioned RISC-V Linux platform specification should either refer to the EBBR and SBBR or define its own subset of UEFI that has to be implemented by the firmware. It should not require a specific software implementation. I would prefer if the base requirement were to have an UEFI implementation that matches the EBBR and for servers to comply with the SBBR instead of defining new profiles. ARM is open to add RISC-V requirements to the EBBR spec. Atish joined some of the EBBR meetings. Best regards Heinrich
|
|
|
|
Hi Heinrich,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Sorry for the "up" post. Agree with your comments and there is no need to create new profiles. The intent for RISC-V Linux platforms is the following Base spec will have a UEFI implementation matching EBBR. Server extension will have a UEFI implementation matching SBBR. Regards Kumar -----Original Message-----
From: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.glpk@...> Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 10:38 AM To: Kumar Sankaran <ksankaran@...> Cc: tech-unixplatformspec@...; Atish Patra <atish.patra@...>; Anup Patel <anup.patel@...> Subject: Re: [RISC-V] [tech-unixplatformspec] Platform Spec Chapters and Owners On 09.03.21 18:31, Kumar Sankaran wrote: Hi Heinrich,Hello Kumar, OpenSBI can collaborate both with both EDK II and U-Boot. For the Linux platform this should not make a difference as long as the UEFI firmware implementation and the SBI implementation are compliant. The relevant question is which part of UEFI has to be implemented. ARM has driven the definition of two profiles: EBBR for embedded boards https://github.com/ARM-software/ebbr and SBBR for servers https://static.docs.arm.com/den0044/12/Server_Base_Boot_Requirements-1.2.pdf. U-Boot only targets the EBBR specification while EDK II is the UEFI reference implementation and complies to the SBBR. My idea is that the envisioned RISC-V Linux platform specification should either refer to the EBBR and SBBR or define its own subset of UEFI that has to be implemented by the firmware. It should not require a specific software implementation. I would prefer if the base requirement were to have an UEFI implementation that matches the EBBR and for servers to comply with the SBBR instead of defining new profiles. ARM is open to add RISC-V requirements to the EBBR spec. Atish joined some of the EBBR meetings. Best regards Heinrich
|
|
|
|
atishp@...
On Tue, 2021-03-09 at 19:38 +0100, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
On 09.03.21 18:31, Kumar Sankaran wrote:Adding EDK-II support for platforms usually takes more effort than U-Hi Heinrich, Boot. I think we should keep U-Boot/EDK-II for the base and may choose only EDK-II for server extension. Hello Kumar,That is still the intention for base Linux platform specification. That's why, I had sent the patch for RISC-V support to EBBR. and for servers to comply with theI am not sure if that is feasible because of SBBR is a completely ARM specification and comes under Arm Non-Confidential Document Licence (“Licence”). Legal guys may have to weigh on this. ARM is open to add RISC-V requirements to the EBBR spec. Atish joinedUnfortunately, I couldn't attend any recent meetings due to the conflict with platform meeting. That shouldn't be an once the DST starts. Best regards-- Regards, Atish |
|
|