coreboot FAQ

General coreboot questions

What is coreboot?

coreboot is a free and open software project designed to initialize computers and embedded systems in a fast, secure, and auditable fashion. The focus is on minimal hardware initialization: to do only what is absolutely needed, then pass control to other software (a payload, in coreboot parlance) in order to boot the operating system securely.

What is a coreboot payload?

coreboot itself does not deal with boot media such as hard-drives, SSDs, or USB flash-drives, beyond initializing the underlying hardware. So in order to actually boot an operating system, another piece of software which does do those things must be used. coreboot supports a large number of diverse payloads; see below for more details.

Is coreboot the same as UEFI?

No. coreboot and UEFI are both system firmware that handle the initialization of the hardware, but are otherwise not similar. coreboot’s goal is to just initialize the hardware and exit. This makes coreboot smaller and simpler, leading to faster boot times, and making it easier to find and fix bugs. The result is a higher overall security.

What’s the difference between coreboot and UEFI?

UEFI is actually a firmware specification, not a specific software implementation. Intel, along with the rest of the Tianocore project, has released an open-source implementation of the overall framework, EDK2, but it does not come with hardware support. Most hardware running UEFI uses a proprietary implementation built on top of EDK2.

coreboot does not implement the UEFI specification, but it can be used to initialize the system, then launch a UEFI payload such as EDK2 in order to provide UEFI boot services.

The UEFI specification also defines and allows for many things that are outside of coreboot’s scope, including (but not limited to):

  • Boot device selection
  • Updating the firmware
  • A CLI shell
  • Network communication
  • An integrated setup menu

Can coreboot boot operating systems that require UEFI?

Yes, but… again, coreboot just initializes the hardware. coreboot itself doesn’t load operating systems from storage media other than the flash chip. Unlike UEFI, coreboot does not, and will not contain a Wi-Fi driver or communicate directly with any sort of network. That sort of functionality is not related to hardware initialization.

To boot operating systems that require UEFI, coreboot can be compiled with EDK2 as the payload. This allows coreboot to perform the hardware init, with EDK2 supplying the UEFI boot interface and runtime services to the operating system.

What non-UEFI payloads does coreboot support?

  • SeaBIOS, behaves like a classic BIOS, allowing you to boot operating systems that rely on the legacy interrupts.
  • GRUB can be used as a coreboot payload, and is currently the most common approach to full disk encryption (FDE).
  • A Linux kernel and initramfs stored alongside coreboot in the boot ROM can also be used as a payload. In this scenario coreboot initializes hardware, loads Linux from boot ROM into RAM, and executes it. The embedded Linux environment can look for a target OS kernel to load from local storage or over a network and execute it using kexec. This is sometimes called LinuxBoot.
  • U-boot, depthcharge, FILO, etc.

There’s []( html) with a list, although it’s not complete.

What does coreboot leave in memory after it’s done initializing the hardware?

While coreboot tries to remove itself completely from memory after finishing, some tables and data need to remain for the OS. coreboot reserves an area in memory known as CBMEM, to save this data after it has finished booting. This contains things such as the boot log, tables that get passed to the payload, SMBIOS, and ACPI tables for the OS.

In addition to CBMEM, on X86 systems, coreboot will typically set up SMM, which will remain resident after coreboot exits.


What’s the best coreboot platform for a user?

The choice of the best coreboot platform for a user can vary depending on their specific needs, preferences, and use cases.

Typically, people who want a system with a minimum of proprietary firmware are restricted to older systems like the Lenovo X220, or more expensive, non-x86 solutions like TALOS, from Raptor Engineering.

There are a number of companies selling modern systems, but those all require more proprietary binaries in addition to coreboot (e.g., Intel FSP). However, unlike the older ThinkPads, many of these newer devices use open-source embedded controller (EC) firmware, so there are tradeoffs with either option.

The coreboot project mantains a list of companies selling machines which use coreboot on the website.

What’s the best platform for coreboot development?

Similar to the best platform for users, the best platform for developers very much depends on what a developer is trying to do.

  • QEMU is generally the easiest platform for coreboot development, just because it’s easy to run anywhere. However, it’s possible for things to work properly in QEMU but fail miserably on actual hardware.

While laptops tend to be harder to develop than desktop platforms, a majority of newer platforms on coreboot tend to be laptops. The development difficulty is due to a few different factors:

  1. The EC (Embedded Controller) is a specialized microcontroller that typically handles keyboard and sometimes mouse input for a laptop. It also controls many power management functions such as fans, USB-C power delivery, etc. ECs run mainboard-specific firmware, which is typically undocumented.
  2. ThinkPads (X230, 30-series, 20-series, T430, T540, T520). Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge are well-supported. Some may have difficult-to-reach SPI flash chips. Boards with two flash chips (e.g. 30-series ThinkPads) are harder to externally reflash as one needs to make sure the non-targeted flash chip remains disabled at all times. The X230 is notoriously sensitive to external reflashing issues.
  3. Laptops often lack a convenient method to obtain firmware boot logs. One can use EHCI debug on older systems and Chromebook-specific solutions for Chromebooks, but one often has to resort to flashconsole (writing coreboot logs to the flash chip where coreboot resides). On the other hand, several desktop mainboards still have a RS-232 serial port.

Some of the easiest physical systems to use for coreboot development are Chromebooks. Newer Chromebooks allow for debug without opening the case. Look for SuzyQ Cables or SuzyQables or instructions on how to build one. These cables only work on a specific port in a specific orientation. Google supplies specifications for these cables.

What platforms does coreboot support?

The most accurate way to determine what systems coreboot supports is by browsing the src/mainboard tree or running “make menuconfig” and going through the “Mainboard” submenu. You can also search Gerrit to see if there are any unmerged ports for your board.

There is also the board status page (, however this does not currently show supported board variants.

coreboot Development

Can coreboot be ported to [this board]?

The best way to determine if coreboot can be ported to a system is to see if the processor and chipset is supported. The next step is to see whether the system is locked to the proprietary firmware which comes with the board.

Intel Platforms:

  • coreboot only supports a few northbridges (back when northbridges were on a separate package), and there’s next to no support for “server” platforms (multi-socket and similar things). Here’s a list of more recent supported Intel processors:
    • Alder Lake (2021 - Core Gen 12)
    • Apollo Lake (2016 - Atom)
    • Baytrail (2014 - Atom)
    • Braswell (2016 - Atom)
    • Broadwell (2014 - Core Gen 5)
    • Comet Lake (2019 - Core Gen 10)
    • Cannon Lake (2018 - Core Gen 8/9)
    • Denverton (2017)
    • Elkhart lake (2021 - Atom)
    • Haswell (2013 - Core Gen 4)
    • Ivy Bridge (2012 - Core Gen 3)
    • Jasper Lake (2021 - Atom)
    • Kaby Lake (2016 - Core Gen 7/8)
    • Meteor Lake (2023 - Gen 1 Ultra-mobile)
    • Sandy Bridge (2011 - Core Gen 2)
    • Sky Lake (2015 - Core Gen 6)
    • Tiger Lake (2020 - Core Gen 11)
    • Whiskey Lake (2018 - Core Gen 8)
  • Intel Boot Guard is a security feature which tries to prevent loading unauthorized firmware by the mainboard. If supported by the platform, and the platform is supported by intelmetool, you should check if Boot Guard is enabled. If it is, then getting coreboot to run will be difficult or impossible even if it is ported. You can run intelmetool -b on supported platforms to see if Boot Guard is enabled (although it can fail because it wants to probe the ME beforehand).

AMD Ryzen-based platforms:

  • The AMD platforms Ryzen-based platforms unfortunately are currently not well supported outside of the Chromebooks (and AMD reference boards) currently in the tree. The responsible teams are trying to fix this, but currently it’s very difficult to do a new port. Recent supported SoCs:
    • Stoney Ridge
    • Picasso
    • Cezanne
    • Mendocino
    • Phoenix

General notes:

  • Check the output of lspci to determine what processor/chipset family your system has. Processor/chipset support is the most important to determine if a board can be ported.
  • Check the output of superiotool to see if it detects the Super I/O on the system. You can also check board schematics and/or boardviews if you can find them, or physically look at the mainboard for a chip from one of the common superio vendors.
  • Check what EC your system has (mostly applicable to laptops, but some desktops have EC-like chips). You will likely need to refer to the actual board or schematics/boardviews for this. Physical observation is the most accurate identification procedure; software detection can then be used to double-check if the chip is correct, but one should not rely on software detection alone to identify an EC.

How do I port coreboot to [this board]?

A critical piece for anyone attempting to do a board port is to make sure that you have a method to recover your system from a failed flash.

We need an updated motherboard porting guide, but currently the guide on the wiki looks to be the best reference.

At the moment, the best answer to this question is to ask for help on one of the various community forums.

What about the Intel ME?

There seems to be a lot of FUD about what the ME can and can’t do. coreboot currently does not have a clear recommendation on how to handle the ME. We understand that there are serious concerns about the ME, and would like to flatly recommend removing as much as possible, however modifying the ME can cause serious stability issues.

Additionally, coreboot and the Intel ME are completely separate entites which in many cases simply happen to occupy the same flash chip. It is not necessary to run coreboot to modify the ME, and running coreboot does not imply anything about the ME’s operational state.

A word of caution about the modifying ME

Messing with the ME firmware can cause issues, and this is outside the scope of the coreboot project.

If you do decide to modify the ME firmware, please make sure coreboot works before messing with it. Even if the vendor boot firmware works when the ME isn’t operating normally, it’s possible that coreboot doesn’t handle it the same way and something breaks. If someone asks for help with coreboot and we think the ME state may be a factor, we’ll ask them to try reproducing the issue with the ME running normally to reduce the number of variables involved. This is especially important when flashing coreboot for the first time, as it’s best for newbies to start with small steps: start by flashing coreboot to the BIOS region and leaving the remaining regions untouched, then tinker around with coreboot options (e.g. other payloads, bootsplash, RAM overclock…), or try messing with the ME firmware without changing coreboot.

Most people don’t understand the implications of messing with the ME firmware, especially the use of me_cleaner. We admit that we don’t know everything about the ME, but we try to understand it as much as possible. The ME is designed to operate correctly with the HAP (or AltMeDisable) bit set, and it will gracefully enter a debug state (not normal, but not an error). However, when using me_cleaner to remove parts of the ME firmware, the ME will often end up in an error state because parts of its FW are missing. It is known that removing some of these parts (EFFS and FCRS on Cougar Point, c.f.) can cause problems. We do not know whether the state the ME ends up in after applying me_cleaner is as secure as the state the ME goes to when only the HAP bit is set: the removed FW modules could contain steps to lock down important settings for security reasons.

To sum up, we do not recommend messing with the ME firmware. But if you have to, please use ifdtool to set the HAP bit initially before progressing to me_cleaner if necessary.