Coreboot Now Supports Another Dual-Socket AMD Motherboard
Phoronix: Coreboot Now Supports Another Dual-Socket AMD Motherboard
The latest motherboard being supported by Coreboot for replacing the board's proprietary BIOS is the ASUS KFSN4-DRE...
Except for running a more complete FOSS stack, what are the pros of switching to CoreBoot?
Very much faster boot. BIOS usually takes seconds.
Oh, that is definitely good. Better/more reconfigurability? Improved stability?
I'm running a Intel Core i7 with GIGABYTE GA-EX58-UD4 X58, I wonder if that is supported.
1. More FOSS.
Originally Posted by Azpegath
2. Security reasons (UEFI has a complete network stack and you'll never know what information it sends during its naps in SMM
3. sometimes flaky implementations in BIOS blobs
4. Keyboard error - press F1 to continue
I think #4 was the reason for the invention of coreboot (at that time LinuxBIOS). Iirc they had a cluster of x86 computers (hundreds, thousands?) and of course it was the bare computer, headless and everything, just connected via LAN to maybe one control computer with a terminal. Now each bootup the BIOS would complain about a missing kbd so somebody had to run from computer to computer, plug a keyboard in, press F1 and unplug and go to the next. Imagine that. And no, apparently you couldn't change that behaviour in the BIOS setup.
"Nuisances" like this were gone.
5. fast and slender design resulting in very fast bootups (there were enough examples and I have seen them also live)
6. Payload options. If you want you cann add a bootloader + kernel and boot directly from flash
7. option to make the box useless for Windows ;-) (Secure boot inverse, you just leave out the classic BIOS functionality and Windows won't run anymore) As far as I know a BIOS is optional for Linux for many years now.
Probably more goodness. I'd LOVE to have more coreboot but things are hard since you need some chips definitely supported (specs or something) otherwise you won't be able to flash your firmware chip or boot correctly later. CPUs/APUs are rarely a problem, chipsets maybe so-so, imo today it is often the SuperIO.
It has less configurability in the traditional sense, with no BIOS menu to OC/change dates/change boot orders permanently, etc. The bios does not affect stability after boot.
You can check that on http://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Chipsets_and_Devices
Originally Posted by Azpegath
Intel was hostile towards Coreboot, though. Or to say it with mild words "unsupportive".
Nice but still not my E-350 based notebook. :'-(
OMGWTF?! XGI? *runs around like crazy* No wonder there are problems. If there was a vendor more horrible than VIA in the past it is XGI (and ImgTec, of course).
Now if only...
... AMD made a server CPU worth paying money for!
And don't forget to have got a 2nd flash chip in case nothing works I am pretty sure that state can be reached easyly while testing. If you like to try coreboot without hardware problems use kvm/qemu.