Stefan, Ollie, and Ron,
Has Eric's Mega-patch been incorporated into the public tree? I've just
created the LNXI mirror of the freebios2 tree and want to make sure that
I'm starting with the tip.
Jason W. Schildt
LinuxBIOS Software Engineer
The easiest way to build Etherboot 5.2.6 is to use gcc 3.2.2.
I found another machine and built an old gcc and etherboot compiled.
I got errors with the new gcc, tried to fix them, but could never get it
to compile. It would be good, if someone knowledgeable could make
etherboot work on the current gcc.
From: Steve Magnani [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 6:39 AM
To: Kimball, Stephen; linuxbios(a)openbios.org
Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] etherboot with LinuxBIOS
On Wed May 25 14:13:05 2005, Stephen.Kimball at bench.com wrote:
> Does anyone know how to build etherboot with a current version of gcc?
> I am using gcc version 3.4.3 and binutils 2.15.
> I've tried several etherboot versions up to 5.4.0.
> I know etherboot 5.2.6 with gcc 3.2.2 works, but that's an old version
of > gcc. Thanks.
Steve - Did you ever find a resolution to this? I didn't see any
on the mailing list. I have the same toolchain as you, so if there's a
to avoid building another one just for Etherboot I'd like to know!
Dear LinuxBIOS community,
most of you might not have noticed, but we've had quite adventurous
times during the last five months. The whole story started around
February, when LinuxBIOS decided to go away from Sourceforge's CVS
repository. CVS does not support restructuring code very well, and
Sourceforge sometimes had delays of a week before changes would be
visible to the world. That's why we moved on to a more modern version
control system: GNU arch.
While conceptionally very advanced, GNU arch also brought some issues
and required hefty efforts. While concepts and architecture are
important, usability and maturity is still a major concern with GNU
Since the Open Source/Free Software Firmware community wins nothing
when we all advance to version control experts but stick with
administrative issues, we decided to go to a mature system that
combines modern version control techniques with a steep learning
curve, making it a lot easier for everyone to have a look at LinuxBIOS
development, or contribute: Subversion
I've been migrating the LinuxBIOS repository to Subversion now.
We have been testing it for the the last month now and it has been a
good deal more reliable and usable than GNU arch.
By tonight the GNU arch repository is read only and will not accept
Here's a quick introduction how the LinuxBIOS repository can be
accessed from now on:
You can check it out as follows:
$ svn co svn://openbios.org/repos/trunk/LinuxBIOSv2
$ svn co svn://openbios.org/repos/trunk/LinuxBIOSv1
Access for developers is very similar to anonymous access. Just add
your Subversion username as follows when checking out the repository:
$ svn co svn://<username>@openbios.org/repos/trunk/LinuxBIOSv2
All people with checkin permission to the GNU arch repository will be
contacted shortly to move their accounts over to Subversion (Many of
them are already). If you are a LinuxBIOS developer and don't hear
from me, please contact me.
Source code browsing
You can also browse the LinuxBIOS Subversion repository online:
If you don't want to use Subversion, or can't use it, you can also
download a tar ball of the latest repository at
More information on Subversion
Subversion is available as a package in all major Linux distributions.
It can also be compiled from source code on most available systems.
See the Subversion homepage http://subversion.tigris.org/ for more
information on Subversion, including a description of available commands
and the source code.
There's also a very detailed online book available on Subversion:
Version Control with Subversion - http://svnbook.red-bean.com/
The Subversion user interface is very similar to the CVS one, so
if you have used CVS before, it will be easy for you to use it and
participate in the LinuxBIOS project.
Comments, flames, questions are very welcome.
OpenBIOS - free your system.
Could you tell me why by moving apci_cluster in front of other
devices, we only need one chip cpu/x/y/z? And why we don't have
to list 19.x neither?
Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov>
Los Alamos National Lab
Have an Asus K8V SE Delux motherboard with an Athelon 64 socket 754
processor with the following information from the manual
Chipset VIA K8T800
1 Gig RAM
Southbridge & Promise PDC20378 Raid Controller
Serial ATA drive, IDE drive, IDE DVD ROM drive.
Boots from ATA serial drive.
Audio ADI AD1980
Marvell 88E8001 Gigabit LAN ontroller
It is a tripple booth system with Suse Linux, and WinXP on the SATA
serial drive, and DOS on the IDE drive. (The DOS drive is not a
necessity for the final configuration of the system that will be used)
Can anyone tell me if it is possible for the OpenBios or Linux Bios be
used to replace ASUS AI Bios?
Apparently, the PCI bus is setup during booth with the bios. We have a
problem with this. We have a system, dual booth Suse Linux and WinXP. It
is connected via a "Stargen" chip which is actually a serial PCI bridge.
This controls an external instrument where each card is a PCI instrument
connected via andother "Stargen" chip. If we shut down the instrument
system, and change a card, and turn it back on, we then have to rebooth
the computer to get it to re-instanciate the PCI bus and recognize the
Is it possible with OpenBios or LinuxBios to be able to perform this
function from the operating system without having to do a reboot?
Please note I am not a bios guru.
Someone mentioned that NUMA support for dual core opteron need acpi
support in LinuxBIOS.
there may be some other solution for that.
1. PowerPC already support dual core and it should support NUMA, So
the Open Firmware must have some NUMA entry definition.
Can we make x86-64 kernel support OpenFirmware interface so we can use
OpenBIOS as payload of LinuxBIOS.
2. enable acpi and add the NUMA entries into it, the Linux Kernel will be happy.
3. If we are trying to use ADLO to load Windows/Solaris/FreeBSD, We
need to pass related acpi info to ADLO....
Solution 1 will be ideal one, and can make Solaris for X86-64 use
OpenFirmware interface too.....
which one is better?
> On Thu, 2005-07-14 at 20:48 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > AFIAK, for x86_64 kernel, it will try to read NUMA configuration
> > > from HW directory. We don't have to export any ACPI table.
> > It doesn't work for dual core or 8 sockets for some reason.
> Since the
> > SRAT code works fine and is in general more future proof we never
> > tracked down why. Patches welcome.
> Does each core has its own memory controller?
No. Each processor has its own memory controller. A processor
may have 1 or more cores. (A processor is a physical package.
A core is a complete logic execution unit). All cores in a processor
have equivalent access to the processor's memory controller.