I have an Intel-based mainboard with build-in gpios that I'd like
to use. However, I cannot get the kernel (5.16) to recognise the
chip (NXP PCA9554). To my understanding, this should be supported
with the gpio_pca953x kernel module.
Or not supported.
PCA95[357]x, PCA9698, TCA64xx, and MAX7310 I/O ports
https://www.ti.com/lit/gpn/pca9554 https://www.onsemi.com/pdf/datasheet/pca9554-d.pdf https://www.nxp.com/docs/en/data-sheet/PCA9554_9554A.pdf
Quite enough to write your own kernel module.
I did use legacy/csm for quite some time if available. However,
meanwhile uefi works fine for me and is actually easier to set up
and maintain, so I use it on all new machines now.
Well, the modules are of course loaded (I thought that was clear
from what I wrote before).
working with uefi. Unfortunetly I cannot get the 4k monitor into
kicking in before the boot penguins appear and thus I get only 9 of
16 on the top of the screen which disappear as soon as the higher resolution kicks in. Not sure it is worth losing sleep over but I'd
sure like to see the rest of the penguins which I know are there ...
sort of.
Sounds like a bit of a luxury problem indeed. ;)
But you're right, modern monitors are often surprisingly slow in
finding signals.
But that's probably with no regard to using uefi or legacy boot.
meanwhile uefi works fine for me and is actually easier to set up and maintain, so I use it on all new machines now.
If you replace a disk on the same sata port with a newly formated
disk of the same layout the boot will fail because the uuid are different.
If you replace a disk on the same sata port with a newly formated
disk of the same layout the boot will fail because the uuid
are different.
You don't have to use uuids at all. Just stick to the default naming scheme.
The BIOS will detect the EFI parition and start what is available
there.
I thought so too and i do have sda1 /boot/efi and sda3 /boot. But /boot/efi is empty.
The BIOS will detect the EFI parition and start what is available
there.
Wouldn't that add a third place to manage boot partitions?
There is the boot priority list in the bios and the boot manager
grub.
I thought so too and i do have sda1 /boot/efi and sda3 /boot. But
/boot/efi is empty.
Is there an entry in fstab for it?
Maybe it is just not mounted?
The BIOS will detect the EFI parition and start what is
available there.
Wouldn't that add a third place to manage boot partitions?
There is the boot priority list in the bios and the boot manager
grub.
The BIOS lists the bootable EFI partitions it found.
/boot/efi is empty.
Is there an entry in fstab for it?
Yes.
Maybe it is just not mounted?
Acc to mount and lsblk, no, it is mounted.
The BIOS lists the bootable EFI partitions it found.
None. I think the BIOS is on csm then.
Is there an entry in fstab for it?
uefi cant read fstab
The BIOS lists the bootable EFI partitions it found. Mine typically
look like this:
-+-
~# l /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT/
-rw-rw-r-- 1 root root 139264 May 5 18:55 BOOTX64.EFI
-+-
if installed via grub
If there is no bootloader on the EFI partition as you wrote above,
there is nothing the BIOS could find.
It did and i removed the new disk to re-attach the old one. Then
no boot anymore.
If there is no bootloader on the EFI partition as you wrote above,
there is nothing the BIOS could find.
I does find the disk.
new disk to re-attach the old one. Then no boot anymore. The old disk
on the same port in place of the new disk did not boot. I think
that's because the bios does use some ID flags to identify the disk
to boot of. I never noticed that kind of behavior on legacy systems.
I have the identical issue between nvme and sata. On legacy it was
never an issue and usually F11 ... or F12 ... on bootup would allow
one to change from the default boot disk.
Interestingly, this never worked reliably for me, neither with MBR
nor with UEFI. The only safe way is to change BIOS boot order
settings.
I does find the disk.
Does it just find "the disk", or does it present it as EFI-bootable option?
For being EFI-bootable, the installation will need an EFI-partition
with boot loader. Your description said your EFI partition was empty
(no bootlader). This will not be recognised as bootable by the BIOS
(of course).Maybe it was booting legacy before, and you changed the
BIOS setting to EFI only?
On the bright side, UEFI does reliably come with a shell (if
everything else fails) that allows starting other systems manually.
On the bright side, UEFI does reliably come with a shell (if
everything else fails) that allows starting other systems manually.
I still don't see the need. Doesn't have any todays operating system
have a boot manager? The result is that the menu to select the
starting OS is moved from the disk to the BIOS.
The result is that the menu to select the starting OS is moved from
the disk to the BIOS.
I talked about cases where something is broken and your system doesn't boot (maybe not even the bootmanager comes up). With MBR this means reconfiguring BIOS boot order,
probably getting some USB media to boot a rescue system from it etc.
With the built-in UEFI shell, you can already check your partitions
and even select what to boot
without having to reconfigure anything or to provide a rescue system
on USB. In many cases I was able to manually boot the failed system
with this and use the system itself then to fix booting.
Some manufacturers provide firmware and bios update tools on efi meanwhile. In that case, you can just drop the new firmware and the upgrade tool on a USB stick and use UEFI-shell to run it from there.
In the MBR-days you would have needed to have a MSDOS-system on the
USB stick in addition
(and hope that the manufacturer would still provide a DOS-based
update tool that is able to run on your newly bought server or workstation).
I talked about cases where something is broken and your system
doesn't boot (maybe not even the bootmanager comes up). With MBR this
means reconfiguring BIOS boot order,
You have to enter the uefi shell by the same way: Dive into the BIOS
and select it. If the system doesn't boot the boot override function
is essential.
I couldn't. The, no, my uefi shell is not self explaining. I failed
to start a running system from the uefi shell. Well, ok, my fault.
Some manufacturers provide firmware and bios update tools on efi
meanwhile. In that case, you can just drop the new firmware and the
upgrade tool on a USB stick and use UEFI-shell to run it from there.
So i have to wait until my BIOS company updates it's tools and i can
save them within the BIOS.
In the MBR-days you would have needed to have a MSDOS-system on the
USB stick in addition
Why DOS? We need to kickstart the boot sequence.
I'v seen an EFI editor which my bios doesn't have. Now i've to check
if anyone provides this efi software.
Some manufacturers provide firmware and bios update tools on efi
meanwhile. In that case, you can just drop the new firmware and
the upgrade tool on a USB stick and use UEFI-shell to run it
from there.
So i have to wait until my BIOS company updates it's tools and i
can save them within the BIOS.
Sorry, you lost me there.
In the MBR-days you would have needed to have a MSDOS-system on
the USB stick in addition
Why DOS? We need to kickstart the boot sequence.
I was talking about updating BIOS or firmware in your system here, not getting a broken system online again.
Updating usually involves some kind of Windows software.
I'v seen an EFI editor which my bios doesn't have. Now i've to
check if anyone provides this efi software.
Which software are you looking for?
rely to the manufacturer. My bios does have a flashtool inclueded but
i have to format an usb storage device to fat32 and copy the bios to
it. I don't see much difference if i dd an image or copy the file. I
see the efi partition as somthing like a permanent usb stick.
Why DOS? We need to kickstart the boot sequence.
I was talking about updating BIOS or firmware in your system here,
not getting a broken system online again.
Same task, we need to kickstart the boot sequence.
check if anyone provides this efi software.
Which software are you looking for?
None. It looked like ee.
uefi adds a layer of complexity. If i want
to use uefi like a rescue system i can't simply use my known tools
from my disk. I think i will stick on my rescue stick in case of
trouble because the tools i'm used to are available.
The difference is that without UEFI you need DOS on the USB stick, not just your BIOS flash tool and image. Ever tried booting modern server-hardware under DOS and running BIOS-update tools from that?
Same task, we need to kickstart the boot sequence.
No, we need to come up with an environment that is able to run the
flash tool the manufacturer provides.
If this tool is for EFI shell, this is easy. Getting a DOS tool to
run under DOS booted from a USB stick... your mileage may vary.
I didn't mean to say that EFI might fully replace your rescue disk (whatever it looks like), it certainly doesn't. But in some at least
for me quite common cases where you just want to get the system booted
it serves that purpose and relieves me from having to boot the rescue disk.
No, i use PXE images for that. Doesn't have a modern server IPMI
and does the flash via ipmi bios image upload?
my bios have ipmi, but imho not supported image upload to use it ?
I'm sorry to say that i can't take a closer look now. I'm sure there
was something like upload but i'm unsure if it was upload for the
ipmi image or the bios image.
Anyway, how have you been? Me and a buddy have been working on doing a Linux From Scratch installation. I had done it about a decade ago, but he's never, so I thought it would be fun to do with him. We've booted into it and now just have to get his wifi working. Fun!
Prism was down for a long time but I tried logging in today and
it worked!
I was looking around to see the current state of ttylinux and see
it's not really active anymore
I felt like people may still be interested in the future, at
least for archiving/historical purposes. What do you think?
Alan Ianson wrote to Andrew Alt <=-
Anyway, how have you been? Me and a buddy have been working on doing a Linux From Scratch installation. I had done it about a decade ago, but he's never, so I thought it would be fun to do with him. We've booted into it and now just have to get his wifi working. Fun!
Sounds like you need network manager & friends.
Maurice Kinal wrote to Andrew Alt <=-
I haven't checked it out for awhile but last time I did it looked to be heading in that direction. I was toying with the idea of doing
something similar for a bbs, perhaps a virtual one?
Sounds like you need network manager & friends.
We got it working today with wpa_supplicant and dhclient! :)
Someone asked about running Synchronet BBS in a docker container.
Maurice Kinal wrote to Andrew Alt <=-
Hey Andrew!
Someone asked about running Synchronet BBS in a docker container.
I was thinking more along the line of a standard ansi-type bbs except
in my case it would serve up the 'linux' terminal which in my case also happens to have framebuffer graphics available to it. That way it potentially could serve up pdf and the such. I think a stock ttylinux could easily handle something like this although I'd have to work out
the graphical output ... also utf-8 will require a bit of
jiggery-pokery.
Last week I started updating ttylinux ... but it's doubtful I'll
continue with it on my own.
Maurice Kinal wrote to Andrew Alt <=-
Hey Andrew!
Last week I started updating ttylinux ... but it's doubtful I'll
continue with it on my own.
It is far too much of a commitment for this old man. These days I am sticking to playing and helping out where I can. As for lfs, I doubt I could quit at this stage of the game. I got hooked around the same
time I first started playing with ttylinux. For me they almost became
the same thing.
It's good to know where you're at. :)
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 991 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 120:20:24 |
| Calls: | 12,958 |
| Files: | 186,574 |
| Messages: | 3,265,653 |