On Di, 09.05.23 15:22, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2023, at 2:47 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 01:31:01PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote:
> >> Once upon a time, Chris Murphy <li...@colorremedies.com> said:
> >> > What about the increasing growth in linux-firmware and in particular the 
> >> > NVIDIA firmware requirements? My reading suggests it's significant and 
> >> > the future growth also significant.
> >>
> >> Could we use a dumb framebuffer in initrd and get rid of all the GPU
> >> firmware from the image?
> >
> > Maybe, probably, who knows… But it's not just the video. The pressure
> > to add more stuff and more drivers will only grow: bluetooth for keyboards
> > and FIDO2, sound support for voice assistance, network for remote 
> > attestation
> > or clevis, etc. We can push this can down the road, but it seems we need
> > to be ready to add move stuff before root is available anyway.
>
> I still think we need less kernel and initramfs in order to get more
> by having `/` available faster. Fast enough that the user isn't
> looking for or expecting interactivity in the few seconds it should
> take to get to `/` being mounted.

Aren't you the one who just proposed LinuxBoot, i.e. having one kernel
with initrd that includes complex storage, crypto, drivers, auth and
things chainload a second kernel with initrd that includes all that?

If you want fast boots and minimal disk space usage, then maybe have
tiny boot loader and a single UKI element after that and not play
games of setting up complex storage to load a secondary kernel that
then has to set up complex storage again.

You are arguing here into two opposing directions. One one hand you
want to chainload multiple kernels+initrd (claiming this was a good idea out
of the problem of sizing ESP/XBOOTLDR sufficientlly), and then on the
other hand you claim there's too much kernel+initrd in the boot
process?

What is it now? Pick one: more initrd or less initrd?

Lennart

--
Lennart Poettering, Berlin
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to