Frans Hendriks has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/39221 )
Change subject: vboot: Clean up pre-RAM use of vboot_recovery_mode_enabled() ......................................................................
Patch Set 2:
(2 comments)
Patch Set 2:
*ping*
Looks like I forgot about this patch and maybe reviewers did too. Is this something that we can still find agreement on? I paged out all context on this but I think according to my latest comments I still thought that this is the best option. If not, how else should we resolve the situation? As I understand, booting with vboot still breaks at runtime on a bunch of older boards without this patch right now (or did we have some alternative fix that I forgot about?).
W
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/39221/2/src/northbridge/intel/haswe... File src/northbridge/intel/haswell/raminit.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/39221/2/src/northbridge/intel/haswe... PS2, Line 130: if (!(CONFIG(HASWELL_VBOOT_IN_BOOTBLOCK) && vboot_recovery_mode_enabled()) Would using VBOOT_STARTS_IN_BOOTBLOCK on all chipset be an unified solution?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/39221/2/src/northbridge/intel/sandy... File src/northbridge/intel/sandybridge/raminit_mrc.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/39221/2/src/northbridge/intel/sandy... PS2, Line 210: if (!(CONFIG(SANDYBRIDGE_VBOOT_IN_BOOTBLOCK) && vboot_recovery_mode_enabled()) || Would using VBOOT_STARTS_IN_BOOTBLOCK on all chipset be an unified solution?