Attention is currently required from: Nico Huber, Tim Wawrzynczak.
Hello build bot (Jenkins), Nico Huber, Tim Wawrzynczak,
I'd like you to reexamine a change. Please visit
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56088
to look at the new patch set (#43).
Change subject: mainboard/starlabs: Add Star Labs labtop series
......................................................................
mainboard/starlabs: Add Star Labs labtop series
Add support for:
LabTop Mk III (kbl-r)
LabTop Mk IV (cml)
StarBook Mk V (tgl)
Signed-off-by: Sean Rhodes <sean(a)starlabs.systems>
Change-Id: I090971a9e8d2be5b08be886d00d304607304b645
---
M Documentation/distributions.md
M Documentation/mainboard/index.md
A Documentation/mainboard/starlabs/labtop.md
M MAINTAINERS
A src/mainboard/starlabs/Kconfig
A src/mainboard/starlabs/Kconfig.name
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/Kconfig
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/Kconfig.name
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/Makefile.inc
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/acpi/ec.asl
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/acpi/mainboard.asl
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/acpi/sleep.asl
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/acpi/superio.asl
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/board_info.txt
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/bootblock.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/cmos.default
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/cmos.layout
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/dsdt.asl
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/hda_verb.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/mainboard.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/ramstage.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/spd/Makefile.inc
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/spd/empty_ddr4.spd.hex
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/spd/micron-MT40A1G16KD-062E-E.spd.hex
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/spd/samsung-K4A8G165WB-BCRC.spd.hex
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/spd/spd.h
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/spd/spd_util.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/baseboard/include/baseboard/memory.h
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/baseboard/include/baseboard/romstage.h
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/baseboard/include/baseboard/variants.h
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/Makefile.inc
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/board.fmd
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/data.vbt
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/devicetree.cb
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/devtree.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/gma-mainboard.ads
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/gpio.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/hda_verb.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/include/variant/ec.h
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/cml/romstage.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/Makefile.inc
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/board.fmd
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/data.vbt
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/devicetree.cb
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/devtree.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/gma-mainboard.ads
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/gpio.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/hda_verb.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/include/variant/ec.h
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/include/variant/gpio.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/include/variant/hda_verb.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/kbl/romstage.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/Makefile.inc
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/board.fmd
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/data.vbt
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/devicetree.cb
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/devtree.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/gpio.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/hda_verb.c
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/include/variant/ec.h
A src/mainboard/starlabs/labtop/variants/tgl/romstage.c
61 files changed, 3,302 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
git pull ssh://review.coreboot.org:29418/coreboot refs/changes/88/56088/43
--
To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56088
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I090971a9e8d2be5b08be886d00d304607304b645
Gerrit-Change-Number: 56088
Gerrit-PatchSet: 43
Gerrit-Owner: Sean Rhodes <admin(a)starlabs.systems>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tim Wawrzynczak <twawrzynczak(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org>
Gerrit-CC: Andy Pont <andy.pont(a)sdcsystems.com>
Gerrit-CC: Paul Menzel <paulepanter(a)mailbox.org>
Gerrit-Attention: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de>
Gerrit-Attention: Tim Wawrzynczak <twawrzynczak(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-MessageType: newpatchset
Attention is currently required from: Nico Huber.
Julius Werner has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56210 )
Change subject: console: Handle verstage as "first non-bootblock stage"
......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(1 comment)
File src/console/init.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56210/comment/5e7b495a_c37632ad
PS1, Line 15: #endif
> Given the back and forth here I'm thinking of making all this explicit, even though I dislike option […]
No, please, let's not overkill it. The arch/arm requirement is more of a non-x86 (or non-BOOT_DEVICE_MEMORY_MAPPED) requirement anyway. And I think for x86 there are other good reasons not to rely on this in the bootblock too, more similar to what Nico mentioned, because CBFS *is* actually a pretty complicated system where it would be good to have output if something goes wrong (e.g. with CBFS_VERIFICATION, it will print an error and die on a hash mismatch... would be good if that was always visible). The thing is just that for CBFS, of course it's going to get used anyway whether BOOTBLOCK_CONSOLE is enabled or not, so if you have a CBFS problem and NO_BOOTBLOCK_CONSOLE you're not gonna see anything either way. For get_option(), I guess that's not necessarily true (but it might).
I would prefer to use ENV_INITIAL_STAGE to guard the CBFS stuff, and then whether get_option() is also guarded by that or not at all I don't care too much about. I'd assume the "using get_option() + using NO_BOOTBLOCK_CONSOLE + error in get_option() + get_option() not already used anyway by other bootblock stuff" intersection is probably not really big enough to worry that much about.
--
To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56210
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I494a33483e306a049aa0c8137a118644fc28177e
Gerrit-Change-Number: 56210
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org>
Gerrit-CC: Julius Werner <jwerner(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-CC: Paul Menzel <paulepanter(a)mailbox.org>
Gerrit-Attention: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 19:02:21 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: Nico Huber <nico.h(a)gmx.de>
Comment-In-Reply-To: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi(a)google.com>
Comment-In-Reply-To: Julius Werner <jwerner(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Attention is currently required from: Furquan Shaikh, Tim Wawrzynczak, Nick Vaccaro, Mark Hsieh.
Caveh Jalali has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56329 )
Change subject: mb/google/brya/var/gimble: Include SPD for MT53E1G32D2NP-046 WT:A and K4U6E3S4AA-MGCR
......................................................................
Patch Set 1: Code-Review+1
--
To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56329
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I4bfc18fd42c6ff2675e6f836c2ecc9617fac3aff
Gerrit-Change-Number: 56329
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: Mark Hsieh <mark_hsieh(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Angel Pons <th3fanbus(a)gmail.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Caveh Jalali <caveh(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Mark Hsieh <mark_hsieh(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Nick Vaccaro <nvaccaro(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tim Wawrzynczak <twawrzynczak(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org>
Gerrit-CC: Anfernee Chen <anfernee_chen(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-CC: Ariel Fang <ariel_fang(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-CC: Casper Chang <casper_chang(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-CC: Malik Hsu <malik_hsu(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-CC: Scott Chao <scott_chao(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-CC: Terry Chen <terry_chen(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Tim Wawrzynczak <twawrzynczak(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-Attention: Nick Vaccaro <nvaccaro(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Mark Hsieh <mark_hsieh(a)wistron.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 18:39:57 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: No
Gerrit-Has-Labels: Yes
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Attention is currently required from: Martin Roth, Michał Żygowski, Marshall Dawson, Subrata Banik, Nikolai Vyssotski, Andrey Petrov, Patrick Rudolph, Nathaniel L Desimone.
Furquan Shaikh has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56190 )
Change subject: src/drivers/intel/fsp2_0: allow larger FSP 2.0 header
......................................................................
Patch Set 5:
(4 comments)
File src/drivers/intel/fsp2_0/util.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56190/comment/e136103c_5fe0a376
PS3, Line 14: looks_like_fsp_header
> i believe upper boundary check is always prescribed isn't it. we don't know what for those additional bytes are being introduced?
Prescribed by? If there are additional bytes, it shouldn't really matter for the consumer unless there were assumptions that the payload starts right after the header. But that is not true. There are pointers to get to the required components within the payload. Given that having additional bytes in header which remain unused should be fine.
> Assume for this case, if we really want to discard those additional 4 bytes of MultiSi API then can't we check if FSP_INFO_HEADER.HeaderRevision < 5 then FSP_INFO_HEADER..HeaderLength - 4 == 72 would help to find the integrity of the FSP header with FSP 2.0 isn't it ? (in this process we actually knew what we are discarding) vs a minimal boundary check?
But, how would you verify the integrity? There is nothing in the header that provides checksum. So, there is no way for coreboot to perform integrity check. Also, there is no way to know what version of EDK2 the header was built with. So, subtracting 4 works in this case but not for other cases.
> If FSP_INFO_HEADER.HeaderRevision >= 5 then we are expecting MultiSi is added and in that case FSP_INFO_HEADER..HeaderLength should be 76 with FSP 2.2 spec?
Are you saying that instead of relying on FSP version, we should check Header version? That should work. But, it would still be the same checks. Currently, FSP version and header version are upreved at the same time. Thus, each header version has a required length field. As long as the provided header is at least as long as the required length, it shouldn't be a problem.
> Sorry may be I'm thinking a loud about how someone can explode the situation and introduced few more APIs or some data fields without bootloader knowledge (may be an imaginary situation unless its actually appears)
If someone adds new APIs or new fields to the header without bootloader knowledge, then those fields would be considered invalid. The consumer (bootloader) has no way to know what that means and would simply discard those.
File src/drivers/intel/fsp2_0/util.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56190/comment/e31a6c28_78223084
PS5, Line 17: if (CONFIG(PLATFORM_USES_FSP2_2))
> Somewhat unrelated to this patch, but does it make sense to switch this from a config to a runtime o […]
I think we should evaluate that separately. For now, let's continue with this static selection.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56190/comment/eae589cb_55ac6fa8
PS5, Line 30:
> Should we check the bytes 10 & 11 as well? […]
Doesn't hurt to check the FSP version against the version that is advertised to ensure Kconfig selection in coreboot is correct. But, like you said it should be done as a follow-up if required.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56190/comment/910b2f16_f08eb0a0
PS5, Line 36: FSP 2.0 header can actually have two lengths: 72 and 76.
I think this can be dropped since this is the condition today, but might change in the future. Probably say:
"It is possible to build FSP with any version of EDK2 which could have introduced new fields in FSP_INFO_HEADER. The new fields will be ignored based on the reported FSP version. This check ensures that the reported header length is at least what the reported FSP version requires so that we do not access any out-of-bound bytes."
--
To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56190
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: Ie8422447b2cff0a6c536e13014905ffa15c70586
Gerrit-Change-Number: 56190
Gerrit-PatchSet: 5
Gerrit-Owner: Nikolai Vyssotski <nikolai.vyssotski(a)amd.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Andrey Petrov <andrey.petrov(a)gmail.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Marshall Dawson <marshalldawson3rd(a)gmail.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Martin Roth <martinroth(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Nathaniel L Desimone <nathaniel.l.desimone(a)intel.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Patrick Rudolph <siro(a)das-labor.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Subrata Banik <subrata.banik(a)intel.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org>
Gerrit-CC: Michał Żygowski <michal.zygowski(a)3mdeb.com>
Gerrit-CC: Raul Rangel <rrangel(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-Attention: Martin Roth <martinroth(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Michał Żygowski <michal.zygowski(a)3mdeb.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Marshall Dawson <marshalldawson3rd(a)gmail.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Subrata Banik <subrata.banik(a)intel.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Nikolai Vyssotski <nikolai.vyssotski(a)amd.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Andrey Petrov <andrey.petrov(a)gmail.com>
Gerrit-Attention: Patrick Rudolph <siro(a)das-labor.org>
Gerrit-Attention: Nathaniel L Desimone <nathaniel.l.desimone(a)intel.com>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 17:52:33 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com>
Comment-In-Reply-To: Martin Roth <martinroth(a)google.com>
Comment-In-Reply-To: Subrata Banik <subrata.banik(a)intel.com>
Comment-In-Reply-To: Nikolai Vyssotski <nikolai.vyssotski(a)amd.corp-partner.google.com>
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Attention is currently required from: Raul Rangel, Furquan Shaikh.
Julius Werner has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56320 )
Change subject: x86/smp/spinlock: Disable thread coop when taking spinlock
......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(1 comment)
File src/arch/x86/include/arch/smp/spinlock.h:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56320/comment/14bfe7c3_cd536bb8
PS1, Line 61: lock->coop = thread_coop_enabled();
> So I had the same thought as your did about storing it in the thread structure, but there is only 1 […]
Oh... hmm... yeah okay, that's a fair point. I still think the semaphore approach is much better though, because like I said there will probably be other situations with the same fundamental problem, and it's better to just solve them all in one go.
--
To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56320
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I1b929070b7f175965d4f37be693462fef26be052
Gerrit-Change-Number: 56320
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: Raul Rangel <rrangel(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org>
Gerrit-CC: Julius Werner <jwerner(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-CC: Paul Menzel <paulepanter(a)mailbox.org>
Gerrit-Attention: Raul Rangel <rrangel(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-Attention: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 17:52:16 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: Raul Rangel <rrangel(a)chromium.org>
Comment-In-Reply-To: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com>
Comment-In-Reply-To: Julius Werner <jwerner(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Felix Held has submitted this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56314 )
Change subject: soc/amd/common/block/cpu/mca: make building the BERT support conditional
......................................................................
soc/amd/common/block/cpu/mca: make building the BERT support conditional
Only when ACPI_BERT is selected the BERT functionality needs to be
included in the build.
Change-Id: I8a21562f4535fb0ea3c53f2ea8df50f66cc6a64c
Signed-off-by: Felix Held <felix-coreboot(a)felixheld.de>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56314
Reviewed-by: Martin Roth <martinroth(a)google.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org>
---
M src/soc/amd/common/block/cpu/mca/Makefile.inc
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Approvals:
build bot (Jenkins): Verified
Martin Roth: Looks good to me, approved
diff --git a/src/soc/amd/common/block/cpu/mca/Makefile.inc b/src/soc/amd/common/block/cpu/mca/Makefile.inc
index 0232805..fd9e573 100644
--- a/src/soc/amd/common/block/cpu/mca/Makefile.inc
+++ b/src/soc/amd/common/block/cpu/mca/Makefile.inc
@@ -1,14 +1,14 @@
ifeq ($(CONFIG_SOC_AMD_COMMON_BLOCK_MCA_COMMON),y)
ramstage-y += mca_common.c
-ramstage-y += mca_common_bert.c
+ramstage-$(CONFIG_ACPI_BERT) += mca_common_bert.c
endif # CONFIG_SOC_AMD_COMMON_BLOCK_MCA_COMMON
ifeq ($(CONFIG_SOC_AMD_COMMON_BLOCK_MCA),y)
-ramstage-y += mca_bert.c
+ramstage-$(CONFIG_ACPI_BERT) += mca_bert.c
ramstage-y += mca.c
endif # CONFIG_SOC_AMD_COMMON_BLOCK_MCA
ifeq ($(CONFIG_SOC_AMD_COMMON_BLOCK_MCAX),y)
-ramstage-y += mcax_bert.c
+ramstage-$(CONFIG_ACPI_BERT) += mcax_bert.c
ramstage-y += mcax.c
endif # CONFIG_SOC_AMD_COMMON_BLOCK_MCAX
--
To view, visit https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56314
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://review.coreboot.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I8a21562f4535fb0ea3c53f2ea8df50f66cc6a64c
Gerrit-Change-Number: 56314
Gerrit-PatchSet: 3
Gerrit-Owner: Felix Held <felix-coreboot(a)felixheld.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Felix Held <felix-coreboot(a)felixheld.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jason Glenesk <jason.glenesk(a)gmail.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Marshall Dawson <marshalldawson3rd(a)gmail.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Martin Roth <martinroth(a)google.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Raul Rangel <rrangel(a)chromium.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply(a)coreboot.org>
Gerrit-MessageType: merged