GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Hi, I was just wondering why the BIOS loads its own set of drivers in order to then load a boot-loader, then the OS loads its own 32bit drivers. Why doesn't the OS just use the BIOS's drivers; meaning, why doesn't the BIOS manufacturers work with OS manufacturer's to just write one 32bit bit driver for on-board/embedded devices i.e. NIC, video, keyboard, mouse etc (?) It seems like they are over-complicating the process by starting in 16bit mode and switching over.
I noticed this once when I could boot from a Network boot/PXE server in the POST process, but yet my fresh install of XP hadn't detected/installed my NIC in 32bit yet.
1) The BIOS is now just a minimal system to get the operating system going. If you were to implement everything the operating system required, it just means a larger BIOS (which adds development cost).
2) The BIOS is relatively hard/risky to update (compared to updating the operating system). It is better to keep the drivers on the disk where they can get timely security updates, bug fixes, and added features.
3) Since the BIOS must be mapped into RAM anyway (for speed reasons), there is no space advantage to using the BIOS drivers.
4) It would be difficult to decide on an API for BIOS supplied drivers, without matching some operating systems better than others.
5) Although there are some advantages to making drivers the responsibility of the manufacturer, the open pluggable nature of the PC hardware means that you cannot anticipate all the hardware that might be present. For example, a user might decide not to use the onboard network card.
Ideally the BIOS should be even smaller, though for historical reasons it does have an API and drivers (going back to the days when the BIOS really was the I/O software).
Last edited by neonsignal; 03-26-2010 at 08:15 AM.
Thanks for the reply...Those are some very good points but why doesn't the BIOS manufacturers just increase the memory size and type of chip so that it can hold unix/linux/windows drivers and switch to a flashable ROM in case you would need to update drivers with usb key(?) Preloading the certified 32bit drivers from the POST the drivers would increase the load time slightly, but more importantly an installation of an OS would be much more simple and acquiring drivers generally wouldn't be an issue anymore.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.