If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
Maybe one can Install real OS to it and bigger storage then it would be quite awesome. But as if I remember correctly there's no binary drivers(nor working nouveau) for tegra, only ubuntu based l4t distro for jetson k1 dev board and arm drivers for arm boards with discrete nvidia card.
If it's Tegra K1 64-bit + 4GB of RAM. Will buy as a personal AArch64 development machine. The most frustrating part is that very-long-waiting.
EDIT: Most likely not, from ChromeOS: arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra124-nyan-blaze.dts. Tegra K1 64-bit is tegra132.
I could handle it if it were 2GB, but otherwise yeah, if priced well I would definitely consider replacing my current laptop with it, though I'm not sure what I would do with my current laptop. I suppose I'd just sell it, since it is actually pretty decent.
I don't get it though, how is coreboot supposed to work on ARM? I thought that was only for systems with CMOS? Or do I totally have no idea how it works?
I don't get it though, how is coreboot supposed to work on ARM?
coreboot supports ARM for a while now. It used to support PowerPC (dropped at some point because there weren't any users left), and there's support for RISC-V in progress.
I don't get it though, how is coreboot supposed to work on ARM? I thought that was only for systems with CMOS? Or do I totally have no idea how it works?
CMOS is just the type of memory that (traditionally) the bios settings (and bios itself?) are stored in. coreboot is just intended to replace the system firmware, which has traditionally been the realm of BIOS (basic input/output system), and now occupied more and more by EFI (Extensible Firmware Interface). The idea of coreboot was to do as little initialization as necessary, and let the payload (OS, BIOS emulation layer, etc) do the rest. It's a great idea, and I wish it would gain more traction...though EFI isn't a horrible alternative, I guess.
Originally posted by http://blogs.coreboot.org/about/
coreboot performs a little bit of hardware initialization and then executes additional boot logic, called a payload.
With this separation of hardware initialization and later boot logic, coreboot can scale from specialized applications run directly from firmware, operating systems in flash, and custom bootloaders to implementations of firmware standards like PCBIOS and EFI without having to carry features not necessary in the target application, reducing the amount of code and flash space required.
It could conceivably be used for anything that needs some kind of hardware initialization before being handed off to something else, but I guess because x86 systems were easy to get your hands on and often have easily flashable firmware, they were the most obvious target for development.
Comment