OpenBIOS February 1998

openbios@openbios.org

33 participants
63 discussions

Re: [OpenBIOS] ASM/C and 16/32 bit questions.
by David Woodhouse 18 Feb '98

18 Feb '98

madman(a)zip.com.au said: > This might be a really bad idea but let me know what you think anyway > :) How about doing a really low level boot loader of some sort so if > your booting linux it goes into 32bit protected mode early where as if > you boot dos or win it loads into 16-bit mode with all the int's that > are needed? I don't think we'd gain much from the 32-bit stuff. It'd mean that we have to provide both 16-bit and 32-bit versions of a number of functions, and who'd ever use the 32-bit API? Linux is always going to have to handle going into 32-bit mode itself, in case it's booted from a standard BIOS. We'd have to write a whole new Linux boot method to get it using the 32-bit BIOS API, and nobody else would ever use it. I think we should stick to pretending to be a normal BIOS for now. We can try adding extra stuff when it's working properly. ---- ---- ---- David Woodhouse, Robinson College, CB3 9AN, England. (+44) 0976 658355 Dave(a)imladris.demon.co.uk http://dwmw2.robinson.cam.ac.uk finger pgp(a)dwmw2.robinson.cam.ac.uk for PGP key. --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

2 1

ASM/C and 16/32 bit questions.
by David Woodhouse 18 Feb '98

18 Feb '98

We're going to have to provide a standard 16-bit BIOS interface if we want to support DOS and Windows users. There's not a lot of chance of making the BIOS go straight into 32-bit mode and stay there. We can still use C in 16-bit mode - take a look at the elks development utils, which are quite suitable for this task. I think we want to write most of it in C, with some critical sections in ASM - after http://dwmw2.robinson.cam.ac.uk/devload/ I really don't want to think about large projects written solely in assembly. ---- ---- ---- David Woodhouse, Robinson College, CB3 9AN, England. (+44) 0976 658355 Dave(a)imladris.demon.co.uk http://dwmw2.robinson.cam.ac.uk finger pgp(a)dwmw2.robinson.cam.ac.uk for PGP key. --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

5 4

Code Structure
by Chris Arguin 18 Feb '98

18 Feb '98

Partially to get people talking about what we should support, I would like to propose a possible code layout. A fairly simple method of sorting the source code that should be fairly extensible. memory/ <- how to setup cache, memory timing, etc... Bus/ PCI/ ISA/ AGP/ <- How to access and set up those buses USB/ etc... Drives/ <- for our purposes, anything that can boot Floppy/ IDE/ SCSI/ Interface/ <- The front-end Input/ <- Where do we get input from, and how Output/ <- Where do we send output, and how Common/ <- Whatever code that is common misc/ <- Anything else For example, my computer would be built with something like memory/Intel/82437FX Bus/PCI/Intel/82437X BUS/ISA/Intel/PIIX Drives/Floppy/Std_Floppy Drives/IDE/PIIX Drives/SCSI/NCR53c8xx Interface/Power_CLI Interface/Input/Keyboard Interface/Output/VGA_text misc/std_timer The Interface/Power_CLI would be something like the Sun-bootloader, or the Alpha console. Other possibilities would be a standard (like in most PCs), or maybe a PC96 compliant one, if that applies. Notice that you can easily change to a serial boot if desired, and I think this sort of division allows for quite a bit of flexibility. Configuration scripts can hide much of the actual details (for example, I would just select the Intel 430fx chipset, which would set up the Memory, PCI, ISA, and all that). Comments? -- Chris Arguin | "While I'm still confused and uncertain, it's on a Chris.Arguin(a)unh.edu | much higher plane... at least I know I'm bewildered | about the really fundamental and important facts of | the universe." - Equal Rites, Terry Pratchett --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

2 1

Re: [OpenBIOS] Licensing of the code.
by David Woodhouse 18 Feb '98

18 Feb '98

dcinege(a)fuckthejunkmailers.org said: > Haven't looked at BSD fully, but I understand it to be more along the > lines of a PD (free for all) type licence. For this type of project I > would not want to do work that Award could come by and just take it > for their own. I believe that a BSD license would allow them to do that - so we can't use BSD either. > I think a middle ground might be a licease that makes normal usage GPL > like but allows the OpenBIOS group (I guess that's what we are) to > sublicease it to companies for the purpose listed above. (I think the > XFree86 project did something like this) If we're going with the modular approach, with the final link being done at the last moment before the flash is blown, I believe that we could use the LGPL for this. I've just read through it again, and it seems to be precisely what we're after. We can declare all the OpenBIOS modules to be library routines, Then the binary-only modules provided by manufacturers are "work that uses the Library", and the only real restriction on them is that they have to allow for linking with newer versions of our generic modules. How does that sound? ---- ---- ---- David Woodhouse, Robinson College, CB3 9AN, England. (+44) 0976 658355 Dave(a)imladris.demon.co.uk http://dwmw2.robinson.cam.ac.uk finger pgp(a)dwmw2.robinson.cam.ac.uk for PGP key. --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

2 1

Re: Some Questions and ideas for gnu-bios
by Pavel Machek 18 Feb '98

18 Feb '98

Hi! > > Let me start by saying that I've never really investigated the BIOS > > before, so I may make some false assumptions below. Please point out the > > errors of my ways. > > Me too!! I've got a pretty good idea how things work, but do x86 asm. > I'm also unsure about some of the memory limitations, and what, if anything, does > the BIOS do once a protected mode OS starts. Under linux, bios is not used (well, with exceptions of APM). Other 'systems' switch into v86 mode to call bios functions. Pavel -- I'm really pavel(a)atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz. Pavel Look at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/ ;-). --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

4 3

Re: [OpenBIOS] Licensing of the code.
by Dave Cinege 17 Feb '98

17 Feb '98

David Woodhouse wrote: > > dcinege(a)fuckthejunkmailers.org said: > > When it comes to a manufature making changes to support a peice of > > hardware on their boards, this means they must release their changes. > > Fair enough. Is BSD the same? Haven't looked at BSD fully, but I understand it to be more along the lines of a PD (free for all) type licence. For this type of project I would not want to do work that Award could come by and just take it for their own. I think a middle ground might be a licease that makes normal usage GPL like but allows the OpenBIOS group (I guess that's what we are) to sublicease it to companies for the purpose listed above. (I think the XFree86 project did something like this) --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

1 0

Re: [OpenBIOS] Licensing of the code.
by Dave Cinege 17 Feb '98

17 Feb '98

David Woodhouse wrote: > > dcinege(a)fuckthejunkmailers.org said: > > I don't think BSD is good for this, and a straight GPL wouldn't > > really be the right thing either. > > Why so? It is not possible to distribute a BIOS in a completly libary type form.When it comes to a manufature making changes to support a peice of hardware on their boards, this means they must release their changes. If this code is a dependant on a peice of propritary or sub licensed peice of hardware they may not be able to (or just won't) use our BIOS. IF the finaly product is VERY modular and VERY flexable, then a regular GPL might not cause problems. --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

1 0

Re: [OpenBIOS] Licensing of the code.
by Dave Cinege 17 Feb '98

17 Feb '98

Stefan Reinauer wrote: > > Hi. > > > OpenBIOS would mean something else. OpenBIOS would mean that we > > publish our specs, not that we are free. Look at sparc OpenProm. > > > > BAD idea. > > I don't really see that. Look at OpenScape. That project was founded to > promote development of the free netscape source. Yes. Another reason I made the change is GNU is almost like a dirty word in the corporate world. I think all of our greatest dream is that this si successful and motherboard makers start to directly use it. This brings up another problem that we may as well get into now. Licensing. Early on we need to decide where that stands and the effects that it has for pontencial commercial outcome. I don't think BSD is good for this, and a straight GPL wouldn't really be the right thing either. --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

1 0

Re: [OpenBIOS] OpenBIOS Homepage
by Dave Cinege 17 Feb '98

17 Feb '98

Stefan Reinauer wrote: > > Hi.. > > I've set up a preliminary OpenBIOS homepage today. It's available at > > http://www.freiburg.linux.de/OpenBIOS/ I just talked with Stefan. This will be the german mirror, of the master site below. --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

1 0

Re: gnu-bios or openbios?
by Pavel Machek 17 Feb '98

17 Feb '98

Hi! > I was just thinking about the name of this list (and I guess the name of the > forth coming project) > > Well a BIOS certainly isn't Unix, but I don't see how they are at all > related. > I think OpenBIOS is more appropreate and sounds a bit better as well. OpenBIOS would mean something else. OpenBIOS would mean that we publish our specs, not that we are free. Look at sparc OpenProm. BAD idea. Pavel -- I'm really pavel(a)atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz. Pavel Look at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/ ;-). --- OpenBIOS -- http://www.linkscape.net/openbios/ openbios-request(a)linkscape.net Body: un/subscribe Problems? dcinege(a)psychosis.com

2 1