Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 20, 2017 23:12 UTC (Mon) by jake (editor, #205)
In reply to: Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go by joib
Parent article: Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

> I believe it's https://trmm.net/NERF

ah, thanks for that ... I searched for it but couldn't find it ... Ron's slides (and his employer's most famous tool :) didn't seem to have it. Will update the article.

jake

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 21, 2017 6:29 UTC (Tue) by hugelgupf (guest, #106267) [Link] (15 responses)

We'll be working on something more comprehensive (and representative of the LinuxBoot/NERF effort) soon.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 21, 2017 23:22 UTC (Tue) by rahvin (guest, #16953) [Link] (14 responses)

I commend your work but the question I've been asking all along is why is this necessary? Google should have the market power to force Intel to sell processors with the ME physically disabled. And even if Google alone doesn't have the market power they should be able to partner with Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft and the other cloud providers to demand CPU's with the ME disabled.

It bothers me greatly that Google and other cloud providers don't use this market purchasing power if they value the ME being fully disabled. Google purchase millions of servers a year and combined with the other cloud providers you constitute a major portion of the server market, I'd guess near 50% or higher. The cloud providers have the power to effect Intel directly and have not acted when the ME is a security threat of unknown proportion.

There are already blackhat exploits to provision the ME with user access to the system. Right now these attacks require user access but as well all know user access can quickly become remote access as the vulnerability is probed and more information comes to light. The ME is a massive security threat and if the cloud providers care about security they should be doing everything in their power to see processors without the ME made available.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 22, 2017 16:41 UTC (Wed) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (13 responses)

> Google should have the market power to force Intel to sell processors with the ME physically disabled.

Google's 'market power' is being expressed in these sorts of projects that help get Chromebooks running with Coreboot and such things.

> partner with Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft and the other cloud providers to demand CPU's with the ME disabled.

Believe it or not features like ME and vPro are actually _selling points_. Intel didn't add these features out of eviliness, having lights off management and back doors into computers is valuable features for people running large numbers of desktops and other systems. They can use them to help enforce corporate policy and such things.

This is what you get when you deal with closed source software.

These features are valuable, but unless they are open source then they are evil.

> It bothers me greatly that Google and other cloud providers don't use this market purchasing power if they value the ME being fully disabled.

Being a big customer does not give you godlike powers over another person's business by itself. If you want to have clout in purchasing decisions you have to have the ability to go and use competator's products.

Imagine if Google demanded Intel to produce binary-blob-free versions of their processors and Intel refused. What is Google going to do about it? Go to AMD and demand binary-blob-free versions of their processors and hope they comply? Migrate their server farms over to ARM processors?

Markets are self-regulating, but only if there is substantial competition. IP laws and such things limit competition and thus limit the ability for people to demand large corporations to obey. Production of unencumbered processors like RISC-V is the ultimate 'out' for this thing and if they are successful will solve these sorts of regulatory issues, but in the meantime Intel is only going to care if it costs them customers.

Hopefully AMD takes the hint.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 23, 2017 1:50 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (10 responses)

Migrate their server farms over to ARM processors?

Well, ARM, POWER, or MIPS. I don't think SPARC is viable anymore. Although I'm not sure ARM is better from "blob-free" POV. How are POWER and MIPS in that regard? I have no idea, actually.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 23, 2017 2:17 UTC (Thu) by drag (guest, #31333) [Link] (9 responses)

Sparc is toast. Theoretically it could be resurrected.

POWER is going strong, but it's very expensive. Technically it's a lot more open then X86_64. https://raptorcs.com/TALOSII/

ARM itself is technically closed, but at least companies have the option to purchase a license. I like ARM because it's free and you can still get binary blob-free ARM computers. The 'bootloader' in most ARM systems provide the same functionality that UEFI and such things do on X86_64. You can have complete control over the cpu from voltage-on up. Graphic drivers remain problematic, but are not strictly needed for basic function. Small and slow systems though. I don't know about the attempts to create server versions.

I don't know about MIPS. Probably in the same boat as ARM, but ARM is generally more competitive in the market place.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 23, 2017 5:28 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (7 responses)

MIPS instruction set is free and open, and you can actually get completely free MIPS chips. However, it's not easy to find them.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 23, 2017 7:17 UTC (Thu) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link] (4 responses)

MIPS instruction set is free and open, and you can actually get completely free MIPS chips. However, it's not easy to find them.

There is the Chinese MIPS-compatible Loongson. I recall at one point years ago RMS was said to use a Loongson-based laptop, because it was totally open. But seems to be discontinued: http://lemote.kd85.com/

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 23, 2017 7:26 UTC (Thu) by joib (subscriber, #8541) [Link] (3 responses)

Wikipedia says that Longsoon/ICT have bought a MIPS architecture license: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongson#MIPS_patent_issues

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 29, 2017 18:23 UTC (Wed) by rahvin (guest, #16953) [Link] (2 responses)

MIPS ownership changed hands in 2017, it was sold to a VC firm. This may mean wider deployment and licensing, right now MIPS is primarily contained to routers and other embedded systems.

>MIPS business is sold by Imagination Technologies to Tallwood Venture Capital as Tallwood MIPS Inc. for $65 million. [52]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIPS_Technologies

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 30, 2017 10:37 UTC (Thu) by arnd (subscriber, #8866) [Link] (1 responses)

My impression is that they would have a harder time turning it around than Imagination, which seemed to actually try but failed to get any significant market wins. While MIPS cores still make up a significant portion of the the router market, I'm not aware of any recent product announcements, the manufacturers have either replaced the CPU cores with ARMv7 a few years ago and moved on to ARMv8 in 2017 (Broadcom, Qualcomm/Atheros, Mediatek/Ralink, Cavium), replaced them with x86 (Intel/Lantiq), or discontinued the product line (Realtek).

The situation seems similar for architecture licensees (Cavium, Raza/Netlogic/Broadcom, Lexra/Realtek, Loongson, Ingenic, SiCortex), all of which seem to have stopped coming out with new MIPS based designs in the last few years.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 30, 2017 23:55 UTC (Thu) by rahvin (guest, #16953) [Link]

Given the patents were sold off first and aren't contained in the sale to the VC firm I'm not sure. Paying that much money for a dying architecture with no significant intellectual property without plans to get more licenses out there would be very un-VC. Imagination was always pretty half-hearted with MIPS and didn't seem to be willing to advance the platform by spending money fixing it's problems. Properly executing and spending money on design and development and creating a model more like ARM with good tools, available off the shelf designs and multiple license types with a particular focus on designs that are already done and tested would do much to revitalize MIPS and make it competitive again.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 23, 2017 9:16 UTC (Thu) by renox (guest, #23785) [Link] (1 responses)

Not so open: I remember a lawsuit about a patent on a MIPS instruction..
That said the original MIPS ISA is very old so any patent on it should have expired..

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 29, 2017 20:05 UTC (Wed) by klossner (subscriber, #30046) [Link]

That patent was filed in 1986, so it is no longer of concern.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 24, 2017 10:16 UTC (Fri) by glaubitz (subscriber, #96452) [Link]

> Sparc is toast. Theoretically it could be resurrected.

Meh, Oracle just recently released M8 and Fujitsu is still selling new servers.

SPARC is also used by ESA in the form of Leon. Oracle is also still paying kernel developers to submit kernel patches for sparc64, so it's not really sure what the current plans are.

Either way, Debian is still supporting sparc64 (I'm one of the porters).

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 24, 2017 12:28 UTC (Fri) by glaubitz (subscriber, #96452) [Link] (1 responses)

> Imagine if Google demanded Intel to produce binary-blob-free versions of their processors and Intel refused. What is Google going to do about it? Go to AMD and demand binary-blob-free versions of their processors and hope they comply? Migrate their server farms over to ARM processors?

From my talks with people from IBM and Google I have learned that Google is actually using large numbers of POWER servers in their infrastructure. According to them, one of the main reasons why Debian has a POWER porr (ppc64el) is Google.

Replacing x86 firmware with Linux and Go

Posted Nov 24, 2017 19:58 UTC (Fri) by joib (subscriber, #8541) [Link]

> From my talks with people from IBM and Google I have learned that Google is actually using large numbers of POWER servers in their infrastructure.

Oh? That's cool. Obviously google have been a public member of the entire openpower thing, but I wasn't aware that they are actually running it in production in significant quantitites.