The roadmap for POWER9, currently the OpenPOWER architecture with the widest install base, basically blew up and the long-promised POWER9 AIO 'Axon' or 'Axone' never arrived. It does also suggest, however, that the situation with Power10 is more or less baked in.

(If they read this blog, feel free to follow up in the comments or with me in E-mail.) Still, it makes more sense than IBM suddenly slamming the door on OpenPOWER after the tremendous goodwill built up with POWER8 and especially POWER9. I don't know who that is, or what internal events at IBM they're privy to, so it should be taken with a grain of salt. It was always a mystery after POWER8 and POWER9's completely open firmware why IBM would take a sudden wrong turn with Power10, but this unsubstantiated post from the same thread (if it's not wishful thinking) suggests COVID staffing issues rather than philosophical concerns were to blame for IBM using off-the-shelf vendored IP blocks requiring the existing blobs in its firmware. Meanwhile here in the computing underground, we have our own problems with Power10, but there may be some light on the horizon for Power11. Remember that they're the company bringing you Pluton: quoted from the article, 'Pluton will also prevent people from running software that has been modified without the permission of developers.' It wouldn't be surprising to see AMD's Platform Security Processor pick up additional lock-in capabilities to reinforce this and other vendor controls. A lot of this stuff is under NDA currently but as systems incorporating FSP 3.0 start appearing we should begin to get a clearer understanding.īy the way, don't expect AMD to act any better. This lets Intel cut projects like Coreboot on x86_64 out of the picture, and can only be seen as a way to directly subvert their operation.

Previously, open source firmware had control on initialization and could call into the closed blobs (or not) as necessary, but FSP 3.0 seems to invert this, giving a new closed blob control to call into the open source firmware (or not). There isn't a smoking gun or significant direct context in this Twitter thread, but the issue seems to be around the upcoming 'Scalable FSP' architecture. For as much flak as Intel (deservedly) takes over the Intel Management Engine and other closed highly-privileged blobs, the actual Firmware Support Package has so far been open source and royalty-free (it's what's layered on top that's the problem). Just in case we needed any more reassurance we made the right move with OpenPOWER: Phoronix is reporting that Intel is about to get even more restrictive with firmware.

Sheepshaver just go with it