Dear TI people,
I'm evaluating suitable SoC CPUs for use in a FSF Hardware-Endorsed low-cost, high-end Laptop. The criteria are here: http://www.fsf.org/news/endorsement-criteria. now, i cannot emphasise enough how almost-impossible this is, to fulfil both the FSF criteria *and* the "low-cost" *and* the "high-end" criteria - but i am going to try :)
already i have run smack into the issue of the PowerVR 3D engine being proprietary - but this can be dealt with by specifying AM3703 instead of AM3715, and AM3892 instead of AM3894.
much more important than that is the fundamental issue of whether the resultant end-user device could be purchased, re-programmed and re-sold with a completely non-free Operating System, by placing a totally locked-down Bootloader into the internal 32k ROM. whilst this is entirely the purpose *of* the internal ROM, it is massively problematic from a Free Software perspective.
so i have a couple of questions, which may be the correct thing to ask, maybe not. please somebody please do tell me if i misunderstand the inner workings of the CPUs, provide the right question and please answer that instead :)
a) is it possible (like it is for the S5PC110) to completely disable booting from the Internal ROM, on any of the ARM Cortex series? OMAP35xx, OMAP44xx, AM37xx, AM38xx, DMxx it doesn't matter which: just... "is it possible". on the S5PC110, you blow an e-fuse, and that's the end of it: goodbye "secure boot" feature.
b) the AM37xx datasheet does not make any mention of the boot sequence, nor how to program the internal ROM: the only mention i hear of the internal ROM with online searches is in reference to the OMAP35xx series, where the internal ROM is "manufacturer programmable only". does that mean that TI is the only ones allowed to set up the internal ROM? can it be changed by anyone else? does it actually mean "factory programmable only"? if so, can a bootloader be placed into the internal ROM and e.g. an e-fuse blown to say "ok, that's it boys - no more changes allowed to the internal ROM" because if so, it would be possible to blow in a FSF-acceptable bootloader, thus making it impossible for the device to be used for what the FSF likes to call "Treacherous" purposes.
much appreciated some clarification. mostly of my own assumptions.
l.