Kyösti Mälkki has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/32414 )
Change subject: arch/x86: Add option for running romstage in DRAM ......................................................................
Patch Set 6:
(5 comments)
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/32414/6/src/arch/x86/assembly_entry... File src/arch/x86/assembly_entry.S:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/32414/6/src/arch/x86/assembly_entry... PS6, Line 32: * executed code, are responsible for getting the processor into protected Who exactly is responsible? Systems? (reset_vector.S in followup, it seems)
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/32414/6/src/arch/x86/assembly_entry... PS6, Line 36: _romstage_in_ram_continue:
It's because the preprocessor removes _start from this file.
Ah. I don't see why you need to define _start in CB:33759 at reset vector location. It used to be a symbol in protected mode, but is now located in realmode?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/32414/6/src/arch/x86/assembly_entry... PS6, Line 43: call gdt_init
Wouldn't we want gdt init as well? Or a way to supply a different set of descriptors? I'd expect the […]
I see some GDT init in followup reset_vector.S already.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/32414/6/src/arch/x86/assembly_entry... PS6, Line 55: rep stosl Isn't this now redundant with wiping _car_region_start .. _end in reset_vector.S?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/32414/6/src/arch/x86/assembly_entry... PS6, Line 72: call car_stage_entry At the end of the day, does this entire file always reduce to the last call?