Linux.com

Feature

LinuxBIOS ready to go mainstream

By Bruce Byfield on December 07, 2006 (8:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

After seven years of work, the LinuxBIOS project is on the brink of making a free BIOS a standard option for computers. Serious obstacles remain, including a lack of resources and resistance from some proprietary chipset manufacturers and OEMs, but the advantages of LinuxBIOS indicate that its availability to the average computer buyer may be only months away.

LinuxBIOS is intended to provide a philosophically free replacement for proprietary firmware in chipsets. It consists of the minimal amount of code needed to start a mainboard to the point at which a payload -- an executable capable of starting a kernel, such as Etherboot -- can finish booting the machine. As the name implies, work to date has focused on using a Linux kernel, but the same technology could be used to start a machine with Windows or the GRUB boot manager.

The project was started in 1999 by Ron Minnich of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Originally intended for embedded systems and clusters, the project quickly expanded to include work on servers and workstations as well. Despite some periods of relative inactivity, the project has "grown by a factor of 10" each year, according to Minnich. The project received a boost in 2005 when it was added to the Free Software Foundation's high priority list, and more recently when the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) project chose to use LinuxBIOS in its efforts to produce an inexpensive computer to assist developing nations.

Throughout the project's history, support from chip manufacturers and OEMs has been mixed. When the project started, Minnich remembers, information from Intel was readily available. Now, information about Intel chips is closely guarded, and the company prefers to promote its mixed source Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) as the next generation of chip technology. By contrast, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) was slow to support LinuxBIOS, but is now a major contributor to the project. Among OEMs, supporters include Acer, Advancetech, SIS, Momentum Computer, and Newisys. The project also works closely with OpenBIOS, a project with similar aims.

Currently, Richard Smith, BIOS release manager for OLPC, says, "There are about 30 chipsets in the [repository] tree with various degrees of completion. The AMD boards are supported particularly well."

Ward Vandewege, the system administrator at the Free Software Foundation, who has been gradually upgrading the organization's servers to LinuxBIOS over the last 14 months, describes the technology as adaptable by a hacker with only a moderate amount of knowledge about the BIOS, but still something that would pose a challenge for most members of the free software community to try.

As of 2005, LinuxBIOS was installed on more than a million computers, mostly in Internet terminals produced by STPC Consumer in India. Because of OLPC and similar projects, Minnich estimates that this number could increase to more than a hundred million by the end of 2008.

Possible advantages

In addition to its philosophical and political goals, LinuxBIOS represents a chance to rethink computer BIOSes. Active members of the project describe proprietary BIOSes as hopelessly mired in the thinking of 30 years ago. Unlike its proprietary equivalents, LinuxBIOS is written in C, rather than assembly language, making debugging and updating quicker and easier -- a crucial consideration in a market where new chipsets are released every six months and vendors have no time to make major modifications in anything except the most high-end boards.

Smith also observes that at a time when the cost of licensing a BIOS from a chipset manufacturer "is becoming a larger portion of the price of the motherboard" and the size of proprietary BIOSes requires more Flash ROM, LinuxBIOS offers a free, smaller -- and therefore cheaper -- alternative. Given the decreasing profit margins on computer hardware, Smith expects that cost alone will make LinuxBIOS increasingly attractive to vendors.

Similarly, because LinuxBIOS is licensed under the GNU General Public License, it can be a more attractive than proprietary BIOSes to security-conscious customers such as federal governments. For vendors, Vandewege suggests, the availability of the source code can also be a means of removing their dependency on chipset manufacturers to make all major changes in BIOSes.

For ordinary users, Vandewege says, LinuxBIOS is also a guarantee against digital rights management technologies, such as the sandboxing feature of Intel's EFI, which controls software access to hardware. According to Vandewege, the introduction of such a feature raises issues of privacy and consumer rights, because "whoever controls the BIOS controls the computer. If you control the BIOS, you can lock out whatever loads after it."

Yet possibly the greatest advantage is that LinuxBIOS is becoming a repository of BIOS knowledge. Because other BIOSes are proprietary, Minnich says, knowledge of them is often lost as chipsets change and experts leave the companies that produce them. As a result, the code in proprietary BIOSes can be maintained, but often not corrected. In their efforts to reverse engineer, LinuxBIOS members can not only build a debugged and more efficient BIOS -- one capable of booting to a console in as little as three seconds -- but also offer manufacturers and vendors a wealth of rediscovered knowledge about their own products.

Challenges

Despite these potential advantages, LinuxBIOS still faces significant challenges. "We've had a fairly rough time trying to get in with the main motherboard manufacturers," Smith says. "We haven't had the numbers and the clout to get our way in. And most of the manufacturers are so scared about releasing documentation, especially for the RAM controller, or, if they're doing a laptop, how to make all the special buttons work. And figuring out things by reverse engineering can be tricky -- you don't want to do something that they can come back at you legally for, and it's just time-consuming. It's hideous." In a field in which new models are release twice or three times a year, this resistance means that, in many ways, LinuxBIOS is continually lagging behind.

The choice to develop for an alternative operating system is also a problem. When Microsoft makes a request, Smith says, "you have BIOS people falling all over themselves to make sure that it happens. But we don't get that level of support." Nor does Smith believe that LinuxBIOS will ever become a mainstream option until it works with Windows as well. This development is theoretically possible, but, so far, LinuxBIOS has not attracted any developers interested in working on it.

In fact, as much as the resistance from vendors, the main problem for LinuxBIOS is one common to many free software projects: a lack of resources. Smith estimates that LinuxBIOS currently has five or six core developers and about the same number of people doing specific pieces of work at any given time. An especially encouraging sign, says Minnich, is that five or six computer science undergraduates have ported LinuxBIOS to specific chipsets over the last couple of years -- a trend that he would like to see continue. Nor is progress helped by the current state of documentation, which Minnich describes as "terrible."

Optimism for the future

These challenges are not easily overcome, but LinuxBIOS members see signs of slow progress. "Manufacturers are getting better about releasing specs on older boards," Smith says, which may help LinuxBIOS extend its support and increase its credibility. And while Minnich admits that he sometimes gets discouraged about the slow rate of progress, he adds that recent developments give him strong reasons for optimism.

For Minnich, one reason for optimism is OLPC's involvement. OLPC promises to be by far the largest deployment of the LinuxBIOS to date. Just as importantly, OLPC's decision not to use the Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) specification for communication between the motherboard and hardware devices amounts to a much-needed updating of standard practices in the industry. If OLPC is successful, both in deployment and technology, as a part of it, LinuxBIOS should greatly increase its profile and reputation for innovation.

Another reason for Minnich's optimism is Google's sponsorship of an automated distributed testing environment for LinuxBIOS. This online facility will allow those interested to test safely and remotely, removing the need for project members to find hardware for themselves. Moreover, because new commits will result in new BIOS images for all boards, the facility will also help avoid forking of code for specific boards. In other words, the new testing environment promises to compensate for the project's lack of numbers and resources.

Most significant of all, project members hope to see the first major vendors offering LinuxBIOS to customers soon. "If we really want to get installed on many machines," Vandewege says, "the BIOS is going to have to come with the machine." However, up until now, many vendors have been reluctant to offer LinuxBIOS as an option.

Now, however, there are signs that the situation is changing. Project members are reluctant to say too much on the record for fear of disturbing various negotiations that are underway, although Stefan Reinauer of coresystems GmbH does indicate that progress is being made on such issues as assuring that users of LinuxBIOS are covered by warranties and that LinuxBIOS boards can include onboard graphics chips. However, AMD is expected to offer LinuxBIOS as an alternative to vendors in its next generation of high-end boards, and Minnich is willing to say that, with the help of the Free Software Foundation, he hopes that at least one vendor will support LinuxBIOS in workstation machines within the next year, and possibly on a laptop, he hints.

Not all these expectations may come to pass, but, as Vandewege observes, "There's a serious amount of momentum going on right now." For the first time, project members can see a time coming when LinuxBIOS is no longer just an option for hackers with specialized skills but is readily available and, as Smith says, "will just be another platform. You'll just have to ask for it."

Yet, for all the optimism in the project, some participants see even LinuxBIOS' ready availability as only a first step. "Getting to a free BIOS is a major step toward getting a totally free machine," Vandewege says, "but that's not the end of it, because, if you look at machines more closely, nowadays you'll find that there is embedded firmware in many parts. For instance, network cards often have embedded firmware, SCSI controllers do, even hard drives do these days."

However, such considerations are for the future. So far as Vandewege knows, no one is working to develop alternatives to these other examples of proprietary firmware. For now, LinuxBIOS seems ready to emerge as not only a player in its field, but an innovative one -- and the sense of excitement around the project is almost tangible.

Bruce Byfield is a computer journalist who writes regularly for NewsForge, Linux.com, and IT Manager's Journal.

Bruce Byfield is a computer journalist who writes regularly for Linux.com.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on LinuxBIOS ready to go mainstream

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

Communication revamped - push Free BIOS as term

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 07, 2006 06:26 PM
Most decision makers are not sufficently computer literate to know or care about anything computer related, except benefits, terms of use, and price. When talking or writing to them, use terms they can relate to get them on your side.

"Open source" had an influence in the technical community, but "free (as in freedom) software" reaches both the techs and the none-techs.

Similarly, when trying to attract developers to make LinuxBIOS compatible with Microsoft Windows you can visually see there is something wrong with the name now, which was not the case when the project started.

Most European languages does not carry the "free" as "at no cost" meaning at all, unlike the English language. A name change to Free BIOS - perhaps with a slogan like "- basic freedom" or "-basic freedom for your computer" might do the trick. This gives a short, none-tech heading, which naturally needs more explanation, but it would make it easier to talk to a larger group of people - especially the people who make decisions.

#

Re:Communication revamped - push Free BIOS as term

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 01:29 AM
Actually, "free" creeps some people out.
People started to use the term "open source" because it was easier to reach out and market than "free software".

It need to be marketed as modern high-performance, highly cost-effective, easily customizable for all types of computers and scenarios.

#

Re:Communication revamped - push Free BIOS as term

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 05:59 AM
Actually, FreeBIOS was in fact the original name of the project. But it stalled, and then some others picked it up and called it LinuxBIOS.

#

Re:Communication revamped - push Free BIOS as term

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 09:18 AM
Most European languages does not carry the "free" as "at no cost" meaning at all, unlike the English language.

Just for starters. Free(as beer):

Spanish + Italian: gratuito; French: gratuit; German: kostenlos.

Free(as in "land of the..."): Spanish + Italian + French: libre; German: frei

I think it is convenient to have different words for two different meanings. It helps to avoid confusion.

Visca l'internet!

#

Beyond Free

Posted by: Administrator on December 11, 2006 10:23 AM
This project has great potential to make computers better, not just save money.

The people opposed (or not supporting) this project have a vested interest in their position.

I can imagine appliances using this technology that might make the PC irrelevant in some circumstances.

#

Re:Communication revamped - push Free BIOS as term

Posted by: Administrator on December 07, 2006 11:39 PM
Too many people think "Free" means "low quality" - FreeBIOS would just have people looking for the catch.

Something like "GPLBIOS" would probably be a better alternative than "FreeBios" - people who are computer-literate know what the GPL means, people who aren't won't misunderstand the acronym, and you don't get the possible misunderstanding of "I don't run Linux so I can't use LinuxBIOS"

#

Re:Communication revamped - push Free BIOS as term

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 12:25 AM
How about "GNU/BIOS" or something like that?

#

Re:Communication revamped - push Free BIOS as term

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 01:17 AM
I suggest "BIOS Libre" which connotes freedom (liberty), even to me who don't know much French.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)

#

Hmm

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 01:48 AM
I hope OLPC becomes a success.

I also hopes the LinuxBIOS manages to secure some nice deals with vendors.

Having motherboards/computers come with LinuxBIOS or being "LinuxBIOS supported" / "LinuxBIOS ready" would definitely be a plus for me when buying a new motherboard/computer.

I also hope many people who read this article, consider to join the LinuxBIOS project and contribute some.

Also would like to thank Google for sponsoring the LinuxBIOS project.

Maybe LinuxBIOS should apply as a mentoring organization for the next Google Summer of Code?

#

I would buy one in a heart beat!

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 05:47 AM
I love the idea of LinuxBIOS and if/when I can easily buy a motherboard that supports it for my home computers I will definitely do so. In the past, I have tried to find motherboards but my local suppliers never carry them because all the good ones are too specialized.

#

I Really Hate To See This.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 05:50 AM
I really hate to see one man, let alone a larger group, spend SEVEN YEARS developing a Basic Input Output System(BIOS). That's a really long time to spend doing something fairly small and, I'm sorry, insignificant in the grand scheme of things. BIOSes became bit players when IBM's original PC BIOS was initially reverse engineered. And that didn't take SEVEN YEARS.

This is all made even worse when one realizes that this BIOS, SEVEN YEARS in the making, will never see mainstream adoption.

Think about it. All of the world's largest computer manufacturers already have their own BIOSes and have no motivation to change that. Especially not to a BIOS that takes SEVEN YEARS to develop to a 1.0 version.

Can I get a Dell or HP computer with this BIOS on it? No.
Can I flash a a Dell or HP system with this BIOS to bypass DRM/TCP or some other advantage? No.
Can I get support for a system that I have managed to overwrite the factory BIOS with this BIOS? No.
Foregoing factory support, will the developers of this BIOS be responsive in updating and repairing defects in this BIOS that might impare my system? No.

Why would anyone spend 7 years on this???...

#

Re:I Really Hate To See This.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 06:09 AM
"Why would anyone spend 7 years on this???..."

Good question. Because motherboard manufacturers don't like to release documentation, that's why it took seven years. This problem of documentation is discussed in the article. On the other hand, it has for at least three years worked quite well on several AMD-based motherboards made by Tyan, because AMD was willing to not only provide a developer, but also release documentation.

Also, remember that the original IBM PC BIOS was much smaller and way less complicated back in 1983 than today's multi-megabyte BIOS's today. Therefore, Phoenix simply had considerably less to reverse-engineer, and even then, it took them a couple of years.

Now, why would someone be willing to spend seven years on a F/OSS project? I dunno, ask RMS, Linus, Theo, or Tridge; they've been spending lots more time than seven years writing Free Software. Remember that GNU/Linux itself didn't really start becoming useable outside the hacker community until about 1998, and even then, it was still a little rough for non-techies.

#

Re:I Really Hate To See This.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 01:24 PM
Why don't you take your negativity to a mental consular and ask for help. Not because you don't have the courage nor commitment to start a project and finish it means others must think themselves a failure. You obviously have some issues with your own failures and inadequacy. Go seek consul it may help and let those that have goals work towards reaching them.

#

You Are So Right!

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 11:38 PM
It's just awefull that someone could have a negative view about such a seemingly pointless waste of time! I'll try to be more positive about the whole thing.

Revised opinion

W00t. LinuxBIOS rocks! It will take over teh world and teh Lunix will pwnzor teh planet. Kudos to the LinuxBIOS team! I can't tell you how long I've been waiting for this moment. Oh, wait. Yes I can. It's been seven years.

This is awesome news for the owners of almost 30 motherboards! Now they are finally free to void their warranty and load up a buggy BIOS with no support! W00t! I am positive that the world is a better place. Teh Linux BIOS will bring peace on earth and feed the hungry thanks to the OLPC use! It totally blows my tiny, inexperienced, juvenile, communist utopian mind.

---

How about that for positive? Does it make you feel better?

#

Re:You Are So Right!

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 09, 2006 05:52 AM
Hahahahahaha! That was pretty good.

I agree w/ you that LinuxBIOS is a good project, and a needed one. To carry on your l33tspeak, it "r0xx0rz j00r b0xx0rz".<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) It's a shame that so many mobo manufacturers like to play the "closed specs" game, because LinuxBIOS is quite efficient. By itself, it's cut boot times on my "boxen" by as much as half a minute. Since I use older boxes as LTSP terminals, this is significant for my end users. They're amazed at how quickly the terminals come up!

#

Re:You Are So Right!

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 23, 2006 07:20 PM
Listen up, boy. Sarcasm poorly scales to written language. If you've have a point, spit it out. And if you're a troll, i'm sure you're an ugly one...

#

Re:I Really Hate To See This.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 08, 2006 02:57 PM
Well, seven years , you mean a long time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,but if think that<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,starting from zero to quite many MB supported<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,then you will not get that feeling<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.and from the begining to the first supported MB<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,it costs only months. just remembering<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,it is not only a software<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,but also it is a big project!

#

Re:Communication revamped - push Free BIOS as term

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 09, 2006 12:02 AM
Yes, if you let them think about "at no cost".

High quality usually requiers a lot of time and effort, and when you are trying to do something technically hard without documentation one could be tempted to call it "futile slave labour" - yet - there it is. So it's obviously made by some really smart people, and smart people don't like low quality, so "poff" to your argument.

People who are computer-literate do not know what the GPL means in general. Developers don't care about licensing issues, but their manager might - if explained without three letter abbrivations - hence "free as in freedom" - and "beneficial terms of use" - "quality control and code audit by external party is allowed" would probably do the trick.

It doesn't hurt to use "free" in the sense the FSF uses it. It is a regular word, unlike GNU, GPL and "Open Source" - the last one has introduced so many difficulties into my native language that it makes me rather annoyed.

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.



 
Tableless layout Validate XHTML 1.0 Strict Validate CSS Powered by Xaraya