On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 9:18 PM Alistair Francis <alistai...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 1:16 AM Andrea Bolognani <abolo...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2019-06-19 at 11:23 -0700, Alistair Francis wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 7:42 AM Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 10:30 PM Alistair Francis > > > > <alistai...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 7:26 AM Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > pc-bios/opensbi-riscv32-fw_jump.elf | Bin 0 -> 197988 bytes > > > > > > > pc-bios/opensbi-riscv64-fw_jump.elf | Bin 0 -> 200192 bytes > > > > > > > > > > > > Since we are considering adding "bios" images, I prefer to add the > > > > > > pure binary images instead of ELF images here. > > > > > > > > > > I didn't think about that. Can we just boot them in QEMU like we do > > > > > with the ELFs? > > > > > > > > Yes, use load_image_targphys() instead of load_elf(). > > > > > > Ah, that is obvious. I'll update it to use the bin files then. > > > > I'm unclear on the advantages of using one format over the other, > > The main one that I see is that everyone else is already using .bin > and no one else is using .elf. > > > but one question comes to mind: once this is in, we will probably > > want to have OpenSBI packaged separately in distributions, the same > > way it already happens for SeaBIOS, SLOF and edk2-based firmwares. > > > > Will using either of the formats prevent that from happening? > > Both options allow this. > > OE-Core already packages OpenSBI by default, Fedora and Debian are > moving to OpenSBI for RISC-V targets as well.
Fedora uses OpenSBI for the last 2 or 3 months now. I don't plan to update BBL builds. OpenSBI packages in Fedora/RISCV isn't finalized, but it does ship *.elf and *.bin files. > > Any distro that supports the RISC-V toolchain (which is all > upstreamed) can build OpenSBI. > > Alistair > > > > > -- > > Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization > > >
