[coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

ron minnich rminnich at gmail.com
Sun Aug 10 23:37:03 CEST 2014

One of the reasons I"m working to implement paging for 32-bit mode is
for our eventual change to 64-bit mode for coreboot. It's gone on the
back  burner for a bit as I'm doing a few other coreboot things first.

I'd love to have the help, if you have time.


On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
<phcoder at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10.08.2014 21:06, John de la Garza wrote:
>> I understand that the calling functions in 32 bit C uses the stack and
>> this is why coreboot needs to use cache as RAM.  Doesn't 64 bit C use
>> registers to pass arguments to functions?  If this is the case why not
>> run in 64 bit mode?
>> Also, even if cache as RAM is used and a stack is available, why not just
>> build a 64 bit binary?  What are the advantages to using a 32 bit binary?
> long mode (64-bit) needs paging table in RAM. So no 64-bit for preram
> binary. For rest it's theoretically possible but it's too much hassle
> for no benefit.
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
> http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

More information about the coreboot mailing list