Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 08 May 2017 11:10:50 -0700
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Cc:        Toomas Soome <tsoome@me.com>, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org>, Toomas Soome <tsoome@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: bootcode capable of booting both UFS and ZFS?
Message-ID:  <2078108.OFyxUdmrtS@ralph.baldwin.cx>
In-Reply-To: <053354DF-651F-423C-8057-494496DA3B91@me.com>
References:  <963c5c97-2f92-9983-cf90-ec9d59d87bba@freebsd.org> <053354DF-651F-423C-8057-494496DA3B91@me.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, May 05, 2017 11:01:03 PM Toomas Soome wrote:
>=20
> > On 5. mai 2017, at 22:07, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrot=
e:
> >=20
> > Subject says it all really, is this an option at this time?
> >=20
> > we'd like to try boot the main zfs root partition and then fall bac=
k to a small UFS based recovery partition.. is that possible?
> >=20
> > I know we could use grub but I'd prefer keep it in the family.
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
>=20
>=20
> it is, sure. but there is an compromise to be made for it.
>=20
> Lets start with what I have done in illumos port, as the idea there i=
s exactly about having as =E2=80=9Cuniversal=E2=80=9D binaries as possi=
ble (just the binaries are listed below to get the size):
>=20
> -r-xr-xr-x   1 root     sys       171008 apr 30 19:55 bootia32.efi
> -r-xr-xr-x   1 root     sys       148992 apr 30 19:55 bootx64.efi
> -r--r--r--   1 root     sys         1255 okt 25  2015 cdboot
> -r--r--r--   1 root     sys       154112 apr 30 19:55 gptzfsboot
> -r-xr-xr-x   1 root     sys       482293 mai  2 21:10 loader32.efi
> -r-xr-xr-x   1 root     sys       499218 mai  2 21:10 loader64.efi
> -r--r--r--   1 root     sys          512 okt 15  2015 pmbr
> -r--r--r--   1 root     sys       377344 mai  2 21:10 pxeboot
> -r--r--r--   1 root     sys       376832 mai  2 21:10 zfsloader
>=20
> the loader (bios/efi) is built with full complement - zfs, ufs, dosfs=
, cd9660, nfs, tftp + gzipfs. The cdboot is starting zfsloader (thats t=
rivial string change).
>=20
> The gptzfsboot in illumos case is only built with zfs, dosfs and ufs =
- as it has to support only disk based media to read out the loader. Al=
so I am building gptzfsboot with libstand and libi386 to get as much sh=
ared code as possible - which has both good and bad sides, as usual;)
>=20
> The gptzfsboot size means that with ufs the dedicated boot partition =
is needed (freebsd-boot), with zfs the illumos port is always using the=
 3.5MB boot area after first 2 labels (as there is no geli, the illumos=
 does not need dedicated boot partition with zfs).
>=20
> As the freebsd-boot is currently created 512k, the size is not an iss=
ue. Also using common code does allow the generic partition code to be =
used, so GPT/MBR/BSD (VTOC in illumos case) labels are not problem.

The intention btw of the larger size for gptboot is so we could have a =
merged
gptboot / gptzfsboot.  I don't think ZFS was in FreeBSD when gptboot wa=
s first
written, but I would much rather have a merged gptboot binary that supp=
orts
both.  It just needs some logic for what to pick if it sees both.  (It =
would
also be nice to axe zfsloader and just pass a different KARGS_FLAG_FOO =
in to
select ZFS as the default boot device to /boot/loader, but zfsloader is=
 probably
too baked into the system at this point.)

> Also note that we can still build the smaller dedicated blocks like b=
oot2, just that we can not use those blocks for more universal cases an=
d eventually those special cases will diminish.

Yes, the BSD label stuff is stuck with a smaller size, but GPT should s=
upport
unified bootstraps.

--=20
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2078108.OFyxUdmrtS>