[syslinux] Etherboot and gpxe
Michael Brown
mbrown at fensystems.co.uk
Sun Aug 2 13:39:45 PDT 2009
On Friday 31 July 2009 00:22:29 Joyce Yu wrote:
> <snip>
> xxxx_probe() does some HW initialization, but leave some to the
> xxxx_open(). This is the difference between etherboot xxxx_probe() and
> gpxe xxxx_probe(), am I right?
> ---------------------------------------
>
> I want to know if both implementations are working? What is the benefit
> if the new ones are used?
Both implementations are working. The old-style Etherboot API is there simply
because no-one has yet taken the time to convert all of the old drivers.
The advantage of using the gPXE API is that you can support multiple NICs in a
single system, non-blocking TX, zerocopy TX, and minimal-copy RX.
No new drivers should be added at this point using the old-style Etherboot
API. It's generally easier to program to the newer gPXE API anyway. (With
the gPXE API you don't have to do things like assemble the Ethernet header
yourself.)
Moving discussion to the Etherboot list, since syslinux is not the right forum
for this kind of question.
Michael
More information about the Syslinux
mailing list