On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 6:31 PM, Rodney W. Grimes
<freebsd-...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 6:06 PM, Rodney W. Grimes
<freebsd-...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Rodney W. Grimes
>> <freebsd-...@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote:
>> >> On 9/18/18 4:11 AM, Greg V wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > I can confirm that the kernel already worked fine when
booted
>> from
>> >> > 32-bit EFI.
>> >> >
>> >> > I booted an old Mac into HardenedBSD using a 32-bit-EFI
build
>> of
>> >> GRUB2 :)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Was that a 64-bit version of FreeBSD? My understanding is
the
>> 32-bit
>> >> FreeBSD boots fine, but 64-bit needs work.
>> >
>> > You would be hard pressed to find a system with a 64 bit CPU
that
>> > could run 64 bit FreeBSD that had a 32 bit EFI implementation.
>>
>> Mac mini 2006 with a Core2Duo instead of the stock CoreDuo (and
the
>> 2007 model's firmware flashed, but I don't think that impacts
>> FreeBSD).
>
> Yes, that is one of the catagories of rare, a EFI-32 bit system
that
> was originally shipped with a 32 bit only CPU, that later got
upgraded
> in the field with a 64 bit CPU, that still runs a EFI-32 bios.
> Are you sure the 2007 firmware is EFI32? I would of thought
> since they upgraded the base system to a 64 bit CPU they would
> of shipped it with a EFI-64 bios.
The EFI firmware is technically 64 bit? but it only boots 32-bit
binaries.
https://everymac.com/mac-answers/snow-leopard-mac-os-x-faq/mac-os-x-snow-leopard-64-bit-macs-64-bit-efi-boot-in-64-bit-mode.html
'Furthermore, it appears that although subsequently released
MacBook,
MacBook Air, and pre-"Mid-2010" Mac mini models all are equipped
with
"Core 2 Duo" 64-bit processors and 64-bit EFIs, Apple has blocked
these
"consumer-targeted" Macs from booting in 64-bit mode. iMac and
MacBook
Pro models released in 2007 with 64-bit EFIs seem to have been
blocked
as well.'
That is not EFI32, so that is not a test case for how FreeBSD boots
on EFI32 systems. That is a restriction apple artificially placed
in the implementation.
Yeah, maybe not the best test case, but probably the most common one.
What matters to users is that a 32-bit loader (bootia32.efi) is
required, whether artificially or not.
>> And probably just the 2007 model as well :)
>>
>> Also, IIRC there were some Intel Atom tablets with 32-bit EFI.
>
> Atom N2xx and Z5xx series Atom models cannot run x86-64
Atom Z3740 ? "Instruction Set: 64-bit"
https://ark.intel.com/products/76759/Intel-Atom-Processor-Z3740-2M-Cache-up-to-1_86-GHz
The above does not say Atom Z3xxx. If you find a Atom
N2xx or Z5xx based system it most certainly has a EFI32.
The tablet in question: ASUS VivoTab Note 8 (M80TA)
https://www.asus.com/us/Tablets/ASUS_VivoTab_Note_8_M80TA/
I can not find enough detail to know for certain that tablet
actually has which version of EFI.
You are saying it has EFI32? And if so based on what information?
Heard from someone that it only took 32-bit efi binaries.
Other Z3xxx users report the same:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/775498/ubuntu-on-32-bit-uefi-only-based-tablet-pc
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
