October 2024 - coreboot - mail.coreboot.org

[coreboot - Bug #439] (New) Lenovo X201 Turbo Boost not working
by Lukas Karg Nov. 17, 2025

Nov. 17, 2025

Issue #439 has been reported by Lukas Karg. ---------------------------------------- Bug #439: Lenovo X201 Turbo Boost not working https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/439 * Author: Lukas Karg * Status: New * Priority: High * Target version: none * Start date: 2022-11-18 * Affected versions: master * Affected hardware: Lenovo X201 * Affected OS: Linux, Windows, ... ---------------------------------------- -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: https://ticket.coreboot.org/my/account

1 7

[coreboot - Feature #433] (New) Unify TPM drivers in coreboot
by Michał Żygowski Sept. 7, 2025

Sept. 7, 2025

Issue #433 has been reported by Michał Żygowski. ---------------------------------------- Feature #433: Unify TPM drivers in coreboot https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/433 * Author: Michał Żygowski * Status: New * Priority: Normal * Target version: none * Start date: 2022-10-24 ---------------------------------------- Add an option to compile all drivers for TPM 1.2, 2.0 TIS and CRB. The motivation is to not build multiple coreboot ROMs for each possible TPM supported by the platform. The tasks would include: - runtime TPM detection (probing TPM_INTF_CAPABILITY and TPM_INTERFACE_ID) - rename the TPM driver functions, make them static and expose them as a driver structure, e.g. struct tpm_driver { void (*init)(void); int (*open)(void); int (*close)(void); int (*sendrecv)(const uint8_t *sendbuf, size_t send_size, uint8_t *recvbuf, size_t *recv_len); } - based on the detected TPM, hook the tpm_driver functions to provide the global TPM API: tis_open, tis_close, tis_init, tis_sendrecv. Some additional API to get vendor/device name could also be considered. -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: https://ticket.coreboot.org/my/account

5 7

[coreboot - Bug #538] (New) [Soft Brick] x230 Dock Causes Internal Display to "Permanently" Malfunction
by Brian L Sept. 7, 2025

Sept. 7, 2025

Issue #538 has been reported by Brian L. ---------------------------------------- Bug #538: [Soft Brick] x230 Dock Causes Internal Display to "Permanently" Malfunction https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/538 * Author: Brian L * Status: New * Priority: High * Target version: none * Start date: 2024-05-14 * Affected hardware: Lenovo x230 ---------------------------------------- Environment: - Lenovo x230 - Stock screen replaced with Pixel Qi (not sure if relevant) (plug & play LVDS) - Coreboot using Heads (coreboot + linuxboot) - Official lenovo docking station connected to external monitor via DisplayPort Bug Trigger: Using Heads/coreboot fine for years with my Pixel Qi screen modded x230. I then bought a Lenovo docking station. Booted up, everything worked fine. Disconnected from dock, booted up, and there was no bios screen. Screen did not turn on until taken over by Linux Kernel. Once in userspace, wayland could no longer identify the monitor as a Pixel Qi or its proper resolution. EDID is blank. Booting with docking station allows bios to show on external display. Restarting did *not* fix the issue, reflashing heads did *not* fix the issue, flashing skulls (coreboot + seabios) did *not* fix the issue. Flashing stock bios *did fix* the issue. I can now see BIOS screen and get proper EDID in userspace whether on the dock or not. *However* reflashing coreboot again, even coming from stock bios working state, and I immediately now no longer get a BIOS screen or EDID, even without ever introducing the dock again. Essentially now bricked with anything but stock bios. -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: https://ticket.coreboot.org/my/account

3 20

[coreboot - Bug #535] (New) T420: Power light stays off after reboot
by frantic from xboot Sept. 7, 2025

Sept. 7, 2025

Issue #535 has been reported by frantic from xboot. ---------------------------------------- Bug #535: T420: Power light stays off after reboot https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/535 * Author: frantic from xboot * Status: New * Priority: Low * Target version: master * Start date: 2024-04-24 * Affected hardware: Lenovo ThinkPad T420 ---------------------------------------- I have recently encountered a bug in coreboot where if you reboot the computer, the keyboard power light will stay turned off after it turns back on. Where if you do a clean boot, the light turns on. I am unsure whether this is a coreboot or payload issue. I am using GRUB as my payload. Just run the `reboot` command in Linux and it should be reproducible. Priority set to `Low` as it doesn't affect usability all too much. -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: https://ticket.coreboot.org/my/account

3 4

[coreboot - Bug #552] (New) X201 not booting with edk2 payload
by Maya Matuszczyk Sept. 7, 2025

Sept. 7, 2025

Issue #552 has been reported by Maya Matuszczyk. ---------------------------------------- Bug #552: X201 not booting with edk2 payload https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/552 * Author: Maya Matuszczyk * Status: New * Priority: Normal * Category: board support * Target version: none * Start date: 2024-08-18 * Affected hardware: x201 ---------------------------------------- Hello, I tried to update my x201 with a new version of coreboot(I lost the working one). After building(using default config + set to x201 + bigger cbfs + linear high-res framebuffer) with latest release I couldn't get anything with edk2 to boot on it. I've tried changing `RESOURCE_ALLOCATION_TOP_DOWN` and using newer/older tags of MrChromebox's edk2 fork. -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: https://ticket.coreboot.org/my/account

3 3

[coreboot - Bug #548] (New) Computer Fails To Recognize Upgraded WiFi Card
by Jeremy Brown May 16, 2025

May 16, 2025

Issue #548 has been reported by Jeremy Brown. ---------------------------------------- Bug #548: Computer Fails To Recognize Upgraded WiFi Card https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/548 * Author: Jeremy Brown * Status: New * Priority: Normal * Target version: none * Start date: 2024-07-15 ---------------------------------------- I am running coreboot 24.05 on my Lenovo X201. I decided to upgrade my WiFi card from an Intel Centrino Advanced-N 6205 to an Intel Wireless-AC 7260; since I selected the option to support Intel PCIe cards in my build config I expected everything to work but my computer fails to recognize the new card. The old card is still recognized if I reinstall it so I know I didn't mess up the socket somehow; I've read reports of the 7260 [working with a modded factory BIOS](https://richbits.rbarnes.org/installing-the-intel-7260-in-the-thinkpa… so I don't think there's an electrical issue. I've attached lspci data from both chips, lmk if additional information is needed. ---Files-------------------------------- 6205_lspci_tree.txt (1.63 KB) 7260_lspci_tree.txt (1.57 KB) 6205_lspci.txt (12.8 KB) 7260_lspci.txt (12.2 KB) -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: https://ticket.coreboot.org/my/account

6 11

[coreboot - Bug #415] (New) RESOURCE_ALLOCATION_TOP_DOWN breaks edk2
by Sean Rhodes May 2, 2025

May 2, 2025

Issue #415 has been reported by Sean Rhodes. ---------------------------------------- Bug #415: RESOURCE_ALLOCATION_TOP_DOWN breaks edk2 https://ticket.coreboot.org/issues/415 * Author: Sean Rhodes * Status: New * Priority: Low * Target version: none * Start date: 2022-09-07 * Affected versions: master ---------------------------------------- CB:41957 enabled RESOURCE_ALLOCATION_TOP_DOWN by default, which stopped edk2 from booting. The commit has been reverted, so this ticket is just to post logs. ---Files-------------------------------- resource_allocatorv4.txt (94 KB) -- You have received this notification because you have either subscribed to it, or are involved in it. To change your notification preferences, please click here: https://ticket.coreboot.org/my/account

3 6

2024-10-30 - coreboot Leadership Meeting Minutes
by mina＠coreboot.org Oct. 31, 2024

Oct. 31, 2024

# 2024-10-30 - coreboot Leadership Meeting ## Attendees Felix Held, Felix Singer, Marshall Dawson, Matt DeVillier, Jeremy Compostella, Alicja Michalska, Maximilian Brune, Pono, Mina Asante, David Hendricks, Jay Talbott, Julius Werner, Ron Minnich. ## Open Action Items * 2024-10-30 * Add clarification to docs, “do not use gerrit change-id or CB: format in reference to already-merged patches”. * 2024-10-16 * Matt: Set up a meeting to discuss board status alternatives and send out invites. * 2024-09-18 * Jon: Schedule a dedicated meeting to discuss the Coverity defects and action plan. * Werner: Send out an invite for the meeting. Sent out a poll to find a time slot:https://rallly.co/invite/1c8J3azXAcje * 2024-05-01 * Nick Van Der Harst volunteered for Dutch. "gogo gogo" would like to translate to Russian (?) * 2024-01-10 * Nico: (https://review.coreboot.org/q/topic:enforce_region_api) * Daniel: Look at how we want to localize (non console) strings for coreboot. Long term project. ## Minutes ### [Elyes] How to know when we should follow Linux rules and when those of coreboot ? Please make it clear. * I’m asking because of Felix’s comment here : https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84074 about “`Commit <first 12 chars of commit> ("<commit title>")"` * [Matt] coreboot’s checkpatch should detect and enforce this: ![alt_text](images/image1.png "image_tooltip") * [Matt] looks like we don’t explicitly state this in the coding style or documentation, and probably should just for clarity * AI: add clarification to docs, do not use gerrit change-id or CB: format in reference to already-merged patches. ### [David] Follow-up on discussion with SFC regarding use of LLM-generated code * It's a new thing that doesn't have a good policy yet. SFC is getting a lot of questions regarding this, and there seems to be widespread adoption in various companies but with various restrictions surrounding how they are used. It's unclear how this applies to the world of free software. * We need to gather data at this time to figure out how many people are using LLMs and how. This will help SFC craft appropriate policy. * How do we do this? Ask people to annotate commit messages if they used an LLM? This would be voluntary (we have no good way to enforce it). * We don't necessarily know who is using it now, and we don't have a good way of tracking it. So we treat patches the way we currently do, regardless of whether an LLM was involved in their creation or not. ### [David] Is anything needed with regard to Russian maintainers/contributors? * We asked the SFC back in April '23, but did not get a response. Given the recent drama in Linux it seems we need to revisit this topic and avoid running amok of sanctions. * [Pono] This is a confusing issue.Continuing as normal for now is OK, but SFC will let us know if this changes. * How could this be enforced? IP address scanning? Is there some retention period for logs? * Pono will follow-up with Karen about this. * Does this only apply to people working at sanctioned companies, or everyone living in the country? * [Alicja & others] - It may only apply to sanctioned companies. * How does this apply to certain community members? We believe there is at least one who may be impacted. # Next Leadership Meeting * November 13, 2024. [coreboot Calendar](https://coreboot.org/calendar.html). # Notice Decisions shown here are not necessarily final, and are based on the current information available. If there are questions or comments about decisions made, or additional information to present, please put it on the leadership meeting agenda and show up if possible to discuss it. Of course items may also be discussed on the mailing list, but as it's difficult to interpret tone over email, controversial topics frequently do not have good progress in those discussions. For particularly difficult issues, it may be best to try to schedule another meeting. # coreboot leadership meeting minutes https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NRXqXcLBp5pFkHiJbrLdv3Spqh1Hu086HYkKrgK…

1 0

Nonfree software in vboot, what to do about it?
by Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli Oct. 29, 2024

Oct. 29, 2024

Hi, As part of my work on GNU Boot, I found nonfree software in vboot[1] in tests/futility/data. The same binaries also probably have free software with missing corresponding source code but I didn't take the time to confirm that yet. We'll take bios_link_mp.bin as an example. As many people know, is used in the first Chromebook pixel, and it's easy to extract things like the Management Engine firmware (with ifdtool -x) and to verify it with me_cleaner (though I'm unsure how to print which partitions it has and print that they are verified). It's also possible to extract things like the MRC binary as well with cbfstool (with cbfstool layout and then using the BOOT_STUB region of fmap). Several distributions ended up using vboot source code to make some vboot-utils packages. It includes distributions like Debian, Fedora, Guix, Trisquel, etc. So these distributions ended up redistributing the mrc.bin for instance when they published the source version of the vboot-utils package. Since all these distributions have repositories where redistributing nonfree software is forbidden, they automatically have a bug to solve here so I started bug reporting to them. The distributions could also workaround and somehow remove the binaries from the source they publish but this then brings a question of maintenance over time, so this is what bring me here. Questions on vboot: ------------------- Who is the vboot upstream, is it Coreboot or is it Google? Who should we discuss with when trying to understand if it's possible to find a solution. Does anyone redistributing the vboot source code also has the right to distribute the binaries as-is (including things like Intel Microcode)? Since they come with no licenses there is also nothing that forbids reverse engineering, right? Would it be possible to somehow remove or move the binaries somewhere else like in a separate git repository and make them optional in the tests? Or should we create free binaries somehow? Though I fear that the later somehow defeat the intent of the tests. References: ----------- [1]https://review.coreboot.org/vboot.git Denis.

2 3

coreboot Meetings Announcement And Agenda Call
by mina＠coreboot.org Oct. 29, 2024

Oct. 29, 2024

Dear coreboot community, Please be reminded that we have an upcoming leadership meeting scheduled for tomorrow, October 30, 2024.[1] Kindly take a moment to review the current agenda and share your thoughts, or suggest any additional items you would like to discuss during the meeting.[2] Thank you. ## Current Agenda Items ### [Elyes] How to know when we should follow Linux rules and when those of coreboot? Please make it clear. * I’m asking because of Felix’s comment here : https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/84074 about “`Commit <first 10 chars of commit> ("<commit title>")" ` [1](https://coreboot.org/calendar.html) [2](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NRXqXcLBp5pFkHiJbrLdv3Spqh1Hu086HYkK…

1 0