Ubuntu Developers Begin Working On Snapdragon X1 Elite Support

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Ubuntu Developers Begin Working On Snapdragon X1 Elite Support

With the mainline Linux kernel beginning to see DeviceTree support for a few Snapdragon X1 powered laptops like the ASUS Vivobook S15 and Lenovo Yoga Slim7x, Ubuntu developers at Canonical appear to be beginning their exploration around supporting some of the Snapdragon X1 hardware with Ubuntu Linux...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Ubuntu-Snapdragon-X1-Begins

[emansom]

Why is GRUB still being used? Do we really still need to support MBR on desktop class distros?

[ahrs]

Why is GRUB still being used? Do we really still need to support MBR on desktop class distros?

Technical debt? Only OpenSUSE (and possibly Fedora?) are interested in using Systemd Boot. They have a boot path that uses Grub and are resistant to change it.

[QwertyChouskie]

Why is GRUB still being used? Do we really still need to support MBR on desktop class distros?

If I had to guess, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". (Does systemd-boot even support dual-booting with Windows?)

[ahrs]

If I had to guess, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". (Does systemd-boot even support dual-booting with Windows?)

It does. It can chain load other EFI executables just like Grub can. In most cases your BIOS boot menu can show multiple entries anyway though, although I don't know about the firmware used on these laptops (I assume it can but maybe it is some bastardised thing that can't).

[CommunityMember]

It does. It can chain load other EFI executables just like Grub can.

Chainloading breaks secure boot validation (because the shim->grub->chainloader changes the TPM measurements), but systemd-boot has experimental support to use "bootnext" which works with secure boot.

[stiiixy]

I'd actually like to see GRUB turn in to an almost-OS boot environment capability, but with a bunch of low level recovery tools as well. Unless the bootsector becomes borked, it should be easy enough for single (Netboot options?) systems to recover from something like that. I'd happily give up 1024MB for something like this. The kernel itself has grown to stupendous size anyways, might as well use it.

[mxan]

Technical debt? Only OpenSUSE (and possibly Fedora?) are interested in using Systemd Boot. They have a boot path that uses Grub and are resistant to change it.

Fedora aren't super interested in systemd-boot, they're more interested in Unified Kernel Images which act as UEFI executables already, so there's no need for a bootloader at all.

[ahrs]

Fedora aren't super interested in systemd-boot, they're more interested in Unified Kernel Images which act as UEFI executables already, so there's no need for a bootloader at all.

Isn't that still using Systemd Boot though? It's just that the EFI executable has the bootloader and initramfs and firmware all in one single signed executable.

[intelfx]

Isn't that still using Systemd Boot though? It's just that the EFI executable has the bootloader and initramfs and firmware all in one single signed executable.

The EFI boot stub typically used in an UKI, systemd-stub, is built from parts of the same codebase as systemd-boot, but technically those are distinct.

That said, there is nothing requiring that either one or the other is used... I don't know what are Fedora's plans specifically, though.