July 2005 - coreboot - mail.coreboot.org

[LinuxBIOS] Re: Linuxbios is always 421bytes larger than allowed
by Tao Liu July 5, 2005

July 5, 2005

On 6/27/05, yhlu <yinghailu(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I can not tell if you don't post your MB Config.lb > > To use cache_as_ram you need to update your MB Config.lb and Option.lb > and have your new cache_as_ram_auto.c I referenced tyan s2885 codes to modify my Config.lb, Options.lb and cache_as_ram_auto.c I just tried to build tyan s2885 images form a clean updated tree and met the same problem. Regards, Liu Tao

3 10

[LinuxBIOS] EPIA/EPIA-M Status?
by Jun OKAJIMA July 5, 2005

July 5, 2005

Hello guys and I hope you tell me what is going on. It worked finally? The snapshot version still has compile error. --- Okajima, Jun. Tokyo, Japan.

5 6

[LinuxBIOS] RE: ECC, A function of Hard ware or BIOS
by Steve Magnani July 4, 2005

July 4, 2005

> Adam Talbot <talbotx(a)comcast.net> writes: > Is ECC memory support a function of BIOS or hard ware? Both. The memory controller and the DIMMs have to support it, and the BIOS has to configure the memory controller to enable it. Steve Magnani www.digidescorp.com

2 1

[LinuxBIOS] Simple complie question
by Steve Casselman July 1, 2005

July 1, 2005

I'm adding print_debug statements to tyan/s2891 and now I get some code overlap messages /usr/bin/ld: section .reset [00000000fffffff0 -> 00000000ffffffff] overlaps section .rom [00000000ffff6770 -> 000000010000014f] /usr/bin/ld: section .id [00000000ffffff69 -> 00000000ffffff7f] overlaps section .rom [00000000ffff6770 -> 000000010000014f] /usr/bin/ld: section .romstrap [00000000ffffffa0 -> 00000000ffffffef] overlaps section .rom [00000000ffff6770 -> 000000010000014f] I'm not quite sure where this comes from. I've compiled this many times and it works great. Where (options config) are the setting for this? A document pointer or a quick explaination would be great Thanks Steve

2 1

[LinuxBIOS] Local APIC IDs for dual Xeons
by Steve Magnani July 1, 2005

July 1, 2005

Hi all, I've reached the point where LB is attempting to start the secondary CPU on my custom board. As near as I can tell, LB thinks the secondary CPU isn't responding. This could be a hardware problem, or a LB issue of some sort. CPU 6 would not start! CPU 6 did not initialize! First thing I wanted to check was that LB is using the right APIC ID in the messages it's sending. But I haven't been able to find a good explanation anywhere of how local APIC IDs are assigned in dual-Xeon systems. All Intel says with any certainty is that the power-up sequence includes setting a unique ID for each LAPIC. There is a format to the IDs (i.e. some bits for logical processor, some for socket, some for APIC cluster), but nothing that says (for instance) "One Xeon chip is assigned LAPIC IDs 0 & 1 and the second is assigned LAPIC IDs 6 & 7". Looking over the s2735 config, and anything I found on the Internet, it seems that this is how dual-Xeon boards work. Does anyone know why? Do the addresses come out like this any time you have a dual-Xeon board, and every time you power it up? Or are there some pins that have to be strapped a certain way to end up with these IDs? (Side note, some Xeons support reset-time config of APIC cluster ID - mine don't). The way I'm interpreting the Intel documentation, it looks like the only way to find out a secondary CPU's LAPIC ID is to start it (via an IPI broadcast?) and have it write it somewhere. Thanks, Steve www.digidescorp.com

2 2