Tow-Boot VS u-boot

For the Pine family of SBCs I highly recommend installing Tow-Boot - https://tow-boot.org/ - on the SPI flash memory to allow yourself much better boot options, including booting directly from NVMe so you don't need to keep the MicroSD card plugged-in.

TL:DR: Install Tow-boot first, then install in Mobian image.

I opened a ticket on Two-Boot because I wasn't sure Tow-Boot was actually installed, and every information on the internet assume you don't use Tow-Boot (and so, Micro SD is booted if present).

Also the PinePhone and PinePhone Pro both can (and the PPP already does in postmarketOS) boot with UEFI nowadays. For that we use Tow-Boot currently but it could be any platform firmware really.

Also you should use Tow-boot which is more user-friendly than u-boot. you can download it here. Make sure you select the one for "pine64-pinephonePro" and not "pine64-pinephoneA64". You can find instructions for installing it here.

U-boot is quite the nice project. Any opinion on tow-boot as a tool for it?

This seems way overblown, from pretty much all perspectives.

1) Listening to community. People can suggest all kinds of conflicting things, and you just can't satisfy everyone. My experience is that many of my HW modification suggestions were listened to, even some I'd expect the Pine64 might have found a bit frivolous, like desire to have some GPIO exposed as easily accessible solderable pads on the Pinephone keyboard's PCB, so that I can mod the keyboard later on and add some buttons to the bottom side of it, etc. I got some help with aquiring of information about various chips, that I requested, etc. I didn't get everything I wanted. Life is hard I guess. OTOH, Pine64 probably did not listen to some other HW mod suggestions that I have participated in group thinking about in the chats.

I think those were the mods that would require more risky redesign, and would cause incompatibilities between Pinephone and the Pro, like sugestion to split DC-IN and USB-IN on the Original Pinephone PMIC to better support the keyboard, or suggestions to redesign battery charging circuitry in Pinebook Pro, so that drivers can limit input current to be able to follow the Type-C/PD specs more closly.

These are risky to follow from us randos on the internet. Even simple suggestions are risky to follow, even if they are correct! Take the addition of diode to prevent some issues with the pinephone keyboard's charging circuitry. The suggestion was followed, but mistakes were made in the long chain that engineering the change takes, and the diode was placed incorrectly and prevented charging the keyboard completely.

2) Bootloader/SPI thing. Yeah it's unpleasant for distros to have to include U-Boot as part of the distro image, especially when things are in flux and fixing bootloader is required for fixing things in general, too, and you have to track non-mainline patches, because Pro support can't be mainlined, yet.

So now there's Tow-Boot to come to the rescue as bit of a center of gravity for U-Boot development/support. Except that it's not really that maintained either with last patches added like 6 months ago https://github.com/Tow-Boot/Tow-Boot/tree/released/boards/pi... despite persistent issues with Pinephone Pro bootlooping, because bootloader allows boot when there's not enough energy in the battery. Some hack patches are available, but not included. Etc.

Also because things are in flux, allowing users to combine arbitrary U-Boot with arbitrary kernel version can lead to all kind of fun things, like hard to explain overheating of the phone, because kernel enabled cpuidle support, and U-Boot version in SPI lacks it and similar things.

3) Diversity/monoculture angle

Focing Tow-Boot can easily be construed as just another thing that Pine64 is forcing on users by default, too. Pinephone/pinephone pro has bootloader diversity, with alternative bootloaders being much better for users in several aspects (like not having charging or bootloop issues, or having multi-boot functionality or GUI) and maybe worse in others. So on one hand Drew is arguing that there's monoculture in distros, but wants to force monoculture in bootloader, barely maintained or developed one from Pine64 support perspective.

In the end, the most important thing is that there's not technical lockdown (secure boot not enabled). Pine64 has no say in what user can flash or not. Escaping the default bootloader is as easy as booting the preloaded Manjaro and erasing it from SPI and eMMC. The phone or pinebook will then boot whatever user wants to boot from SD card.

coreboot just initializes the hardware, the logo is something that the payload displays: https://www.coreboot.org/Payloads

The most typically used payload is u-boot: https://docs.u-boot.org/en/latest/

u-boot supports specifying splash screens via "splashfile", but it seems only bmp and maybe some raw image format are supported: https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/blob/2f0282922b2c458eea7f85...

In other words, no support for png, which this exploit uses :). That doesn't mean that coreboot/u-boot aren't written in C though which is a language known for its vulnerabilities.

Probably a better example than WiFi would be the on-chip SDRAM controller. It's always somebody's IP and there's a blob in the boot firmware that's just binary register settings. Like so:

https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/blob/master/arch/riscv/dts/...

Hello, It's my understanding that the following OSS software is used in the AtGames Legends family of products. Specifically: "Das U-Boot" https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot GPL-2.0+ Linux Kernel https://github.com/torvalds/linux GPL-2.0 The AtGames website at https://www.atgames.us/pages/credits does not contain the source code used in these products. Specifically, the GPL requires that if any modifications are made to GPL code, you must make the source code available to the users of the program as described in the GPL, and they must be allowed to redistribute and modify it as described in the GPL. Any modification to u-boot or the Linux Kernel adding the ability to boot a device must be made available to users of the program. Please see the following links regarding acceptable use of GPL software: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLRequireSourcePostedPublic https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#WhyDoesTheGPLPermitUsersToPublishTheirModifiedVersions https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLCommercially https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLInProprietarySystem https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#DistributingSourceIsInconvenient Please let this request serve as written notice of a request for source code for the OSS software used in the following products: HA2810, HA2811, HA2812 AtGames Legends Core Puck HA2819 AtGames Legends Core Max HA8800, HA8801, HA8802 AtGames Legends Ultimate HA8810, HA8812 AtGames Legends Ultimate Mini HA8819, HA8819C AtGames Legends Pinball (Model unknown) AtGames Legends Pinball Micro At this point in time, AtGames is in violation of the GPL and should work to return to compliance by publishing the requested source code and making it available to users of the products.

Upstream u-boot also supports quite a lot of boards: https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/tree/master/arch/arm/dts

git clone https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot make smdk5250_defconfig Makefile:40: *** missing operator. Stop.

Hey everyone, if this question is off-topic I apologize in advance and if you can redirect me into correct channel or any other source where I can ask question I would happily do, for now I think this is the best place to ask. I daily drive arch and wanted to run freeBSD/riscv64 image on qemu following this https://wiki.freebsd.org/riscv#QEMU_Emulator and u-boot guide: https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/blob/master/doc/board/emulation/qemu-riscv.rst However it seems I'm doing something wrong and compilation results in error here is all additional info: https://pastebin.com/72shccGa

The normal way this is done is the DDR training blob is just embedded into the bootloader like any other data, and the bootloader loads it into the PMU. Same exact end result, minus involving a Cortex-M4 core for no reason and minus sticking the blob in external flash for no reason. Here, this is how U-Boot does it on every other platform:

https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/blob/master/drivers/ddr/imx...

Same code, just running on the main CPU because it is absolutely pointless running it on another core, unless you're trying to obfuscate things to appease the FSF. And then the blob gets appended to the U-Boot image post-build:

https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/blob/master/tools/imx8m_ima...

Purism went out of their way and wasted a ton of engineering hours just to create a more convoluted process with precisely the same end result, because somehow all these extra layers of obfuscation made the blob not a blob any more in the FSF's eyes.

The RK3399 LPDDR4 training code is open-source (albeit rather impenetrable to read) - implementations exist in coreboot, u-boot, and levinboot, so closed source firmware isn't required. I'm afraid I don't know answers to the other questions.