Why do we need a bootloader in an embedded device?

Question

I\'m working with ELinux kernel on ARM cortex-A8.

I know how the bootloader works and what job it\'s doing. But i\'ve got a question - why do we need bootloader,

Answer 1

In the context of Linux, the boot loader is responsible for some predefined tasks. As this question is arm tagged, I think that ARM booting might be a useful resource. Specifically, the boot loader was/is responsible for setting up an ATAG list that describing the amount of RAM, a kernel command line, and other parameters. One of the most important parameters is the machine type. With device trees, an entire description of the board is passed. This makes a stock ARM Linux impossible to boot with out some code to setup the parameters as described.

The parameters allows one generic Linux to support multiple devices. For instance, an ARM Debian kernel can support hundreds of different board types. Uboot or other boot loader can dynamically determine this information or it can be hard coded for the board.

You might also like to look at bootloader info page here at stack overflow.

A basic system might be able to setup ATAGS and copy NOR flash to SRAM. However, it is usually a little more complex than this. Linux needs RAM setup, so you may have to initialize an SDRAM controller. If you use NAND flash, you have to handle bad blocks and the copy may be a little more complex than memcpy().

Linux often has some latent driver bugs where a driver will assume that a clock is initialized. For instance if Uboot always initializes an Ethernet clock for a particular machine, the Linux Ethernet driver may have neglected to setup this clock. This can be especially true with clock trees.

Some systems require boot image formats that are not supported by Linux; for example a special header which can initialize hardware immediately; like configuring the devices to read initial code from. Additionally, often there is hardware that should be configured immediately; a boot loader can do this quickly whereas the normal structure of Linux may delay this significantly resulting in I/O conflicts, etc.

From a pragmatic perspective, it is simpler to use a boot loader. However, there is nothing to prevent you from altering Linux's source to boot directly from it; although it maybe like pasting the boot loader code directly to the start of Linux.

See Also: Coreboot, Uboot, and Wikipedia's comparison. Barebox is a lesser known, but well structured and modern boot loader for the ARM. RedBoot is also used in some ARM systems; RedBoot partitions are supported in the kernel tree.

Answer 2

Apart from what is stated in all the other answers - which is correct - in some cases the system has to go through different execution modes, take as example TrustZone for secure ARM chips. It is possible to still consider it as sort of HW initialization, but what makes it peculiar is the fact that there are additional limitations (ex: memory available) that make it impractical, if not impossible, to do everything in a single binary, thus multiple stages of bootloader are available.

Furthermore, for security reason, each of them is signed and can perform its job only if it meets the security requirements.

Answer 3

A boot loader is a computer program that loads the main operating system or runtime environment for the computer after completion of the self-tests.

^ _{From Wikipedia Article}

So basically bootloader is doing just what you wanted - copying data from flash into operating memory. It's really that simple.

If you want to know more about boostrapping the OS, I highly recommend you read the linked article. Boot phase consists, apart from tests, also of checking peripherals and some other things. Skipping them makes sense only on very simple embedded devices, and that's why their bootloaders are even simpler:

Some embedded systems do not require a noticeable boot sequence to begin functioning and when turned on may simply run operational programs that are stored in ROM.

_{The same source}

Answer 4

The primary bootloader is usually built in into the silicon and performs the load of the first USER code that will be run in the system.

The bootloader exists because there is no standardized protocol for loading the first code, since it is chip dependent. Sometimes the code can be loaded through a serial port, a flash memory, or even a hard drive. It is bootloader function to locate it.

Once the user code is loaded and running, the bootloader is no longer used and the correctness of the system execution is user responsibility.

In the embedded linux chain, the primary bootloader will setup and run the Uboot. Then Uboot will find the linux kernel and load it.

Answer 5

Why we can't directly load the kernel into RAM from flash memory without bootloader? If we load it what will happen? In fact, processor will not support it, but why are we following the procedure?

Bartek, Artless, and Felipe all give parts of the picture.

Every embedded processor type (E.G. 386EX, Coretex-A53, EM5200) will do something automatically when it is reset or powered on. Sometimes that something is different depending on whether the power is cycled or the device is reset. Some embedded processors allow you to change that something based on voltages applied to different pins when the device is powered or reset.

Regardless, there is a limited amount of something that a processor can do, because of the physical space on-processor required to define that something, whether it is on-chip FLASH, instruction micro-code, or some other mechanism.

This limit means that the something is

• fixed purpose, does one thing as quickly as possible.
• limited in scope and capability, typically loading a small block of code (often a few kilobytes or less) into a fixed memory location and executing from the start of the loaded code.
• unmodifiable.

So what a processor does in response to reset or power-cycle cannot be changed, and cannot do very much, and we don't want it to automatically copy hundreds of megabytes or gigabytes into memory which may not exist or may not be initialized, and which could take a looooong time.

So....

We set up a small program which is smaller than the smallest size permitted across all of the devices we are going to use. That program is stored wherever the something needs it to be.

Sometimes the small program is U-Boot. Sometimes even U-Boot is too big for initial load, so the small program then in turn loads U-Boot.

The point is that whatever gets loaded by the something, is modifiable as needed for a particular system. If it is U-Boot, great, if not, it knows where to load the main operating system or where to load U-Boot (or some other bootloader).

U-Boot (speaking of bootloaders in general) then configures a minimal set of devices, memory, chip settings, etc., to enable the main OS to be loaded and started. The main OS init takes care of any additional configuration or initialization.

So the sequence is:

• Processor power-on or reset
• Something loads initial boot code (or U-Boot style embedded bootloader)
• Initial boot code (may not be needed)
• U-Boot (or other general embedded bootloader)
• Linux init

Answer 6

The kernel requires the hardware on which you are working to be in a particular state. All the hardware you used needs to be checked for its state and initialized for its further operation. This is one of the main reasons to use a boot loader in an embedded (or any other environment), apart from its use to load a kernel image into the RAM.
When you turn on a system, the RAM is also not in a useful state (fully initialized to use) for us to load kernel into it. Therefore, we cannot load a kernel directly (to answer your question)and thus arises the need for a construct to initialize it.