Re: OLPC: Add support for calling into Open Firmware

[Jordan Crouse <jordan.crouse@amd.com>]

On 20/04/08 17:39 -1000, Mitch Bradley wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Mitch Bradley wrote:
>>>
>>> The x86 architecture doesn't make this problem easy.
>>>
>>
>> [long rant about the x86 architecture]
>>
>> It would be more useful if you described the actual defined entry 
>> conditions from OpenFirmware look like, including if they are well-defined 
>> for all OF implementations or only for OLPC.
>>
>>     -hpa
>
> Fair enough...
>
> To get the second subquestion out of the way:  At the present time, on the 
> x86 architecture, "all OF implementations" and "OLPC" are effectively the 
> same.  I am unaware of any other x86 OFW deployments in current use.  There 
> have been some in the past, on bespoke systems such as Network Appliance 
> servers and at least one settop box, but those have fallen by the wayside 
> as those companies have shifted over to commodity PC hardware.  The current 
> market status quo is that x86 boards are primarily designed for Windows, 
> and thus must run legacy BIOS, with some recent migration to EFI, neither 
> of which are open source in the strong sense.  While I would like to see 
> more OFW penetration into the larger x86 market, I don't really expect it.  
> x86 motherboard manufacturing is becoming more and more difficult as signal 
> speeds increase, leading to a decline in the number of manufacturers.  The 
> existing manufacturers depend on Windows for sales volume and their 
> internal procedures and working knowledge are based on legacy BIOS.

/me puts on his coreboot hat

This is off topic slightly, but let it be known that the coreboot project
considers OFW a very valid option for x86 platforms.  A kernel that
worked happily with OFW would greatly encourage people to adopt it in
lieu of other BIOS / firmware solutions.

I return you to your previously scheduled debate.

Jordan