coreboot September 2005

coreboot@coreboot.org

45 participants
117 discussions

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Re: topics for linuxbios summit
by Lu, Yinghai 07 Sep '05

07 Sep '05

eric> > Before we generate ACPI or anything else we need to move the relevant eric> > information eric> > into the internal device tree. eric> > YH: Good point, But I worry that we make LinuxBIOS more complicated. Stepan: No, the information has to be reorganized. Currently pirq and mptables Stepan: have to be hand crafted, and this is the complicated thing. Instead the Stepan: abstract information should be put to the configuration filess, if it Stepan: can not be probed. YH: I suggest to add 1. one node id to ram_resource, so the index will be (idx<<8 | nodeid), So I can re-use ram_resource in pci_domain for SRAT creating. 2. for apci_cluster_id, will add two fields core_id and node_id, ( instantiate it when cpu_init)... 3. pci device: add pci_irq_routing, and pci_possiable_resource ( for apci _PRT and _PRS...) how about ioapci in the internal tree? YH

1 0

RE: [LinuxBIOS] LNXI Merge: lnxi-patch-14/16
by Lu, Yinghai 07 Sep '05

07 Sep '05

>Are io-apics limited to apic ids 0x0-0x0f as well? > >My memory says to me the limit should be 0x0-0xff... before enable ext_apic_id, Opteron only can use 4 bit for apic id, So only 16 apic id. After enable ext_apic_id in every opteron, it will use 8 bit for apic id, So we got 256 apic id. Then CPU can use 0x10 above apic id. some io apic device only support 4 bit apic id, So We can leave 0x0-0xf to them. that is for AMD, it is said that intel's from p4 has 256 for default. I cut and paste something for you from Kernel list. > - 1: 82489DX -- communication using a five-wire inter-APIC bus, 8-bit > physical ID, 32-bit logical ID, etc., > > - 2: Pentium-style -- communication using a three-wire inter-APIC bus, > 4-bit physical ID, 8-bit logical ID, etc., > > - 3: P4-style -- communication using the system bus, 8-bit physical ID, > 8-bit logical ID, etc. >According to what AMD told us, all K8 CPUs support 8-bit APIC IDs >("extended APIC IDs" in their speak), but they are only enabled >"when both ApicExtId and ApicExtBrdCst in the HyperTransport Transaction >Control Register are set". YH

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] topics for linuxbios summit
by Lu, Yinghai 07 Sep '05

07 Sep '05

Any thing that we need to prepare? 1. dual core: cpu scan in northbridge.c or amd_sibling_init... 2. Cache as RAM.... 3. ACPI: how to create DSDT ( Config.lb + scan to produce AMI directly?) Only support _PRT at first step? 4. ACPI: SRAT scan pci conf? 5. Open Firmware support in Kernel for i386 and x86_64 6. OpenEFI or FreeEFI as payload for LinuxBIOS....? 7. USB ROM eumluator in Linux.... 8. Serverworks chipset: Who and how? 9. CK804 support etc...., Steven from Bench? 10. K8 E0 memhole support in raminit.c or northbridge.c? Regards Yinghai Lu

4 4

RE: [LinuxBIOS] LNXI Merge: lnxi-patch-15/16
by Lu, Yinghai 07 Sep '05

07 Sep '05

I tried to make cache_as_ram_auto.c more smaller, the problem is I can not use jmp __cpu_reset, and I need use goto cpu_reset_x YH -----Original Message----- From: ebiederman(a)lnxi.com [mailto:ebiederman@lnxi.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 1:26 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: Jason Schildt; linuxbios(a)openbios.org Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] LNXI Merge: lnxi-patch-15/16 "Lu, Yinghai" <yinghai.lu(a)amd.com> writes: > I think CAR for AMD Opteron MB esp Tyan MBs are validated. > > I don't understand the #ifdef cause problem.... > > And I didn't enable that on other MB that I can test. > > Also I didn't enable dual support for other MB too. > > You should know some MB don't support dual core because VRM problem...., > you could burn out the MB... > > So you could enable the dual core support for the MB that is not > validated or talk to HW engineers of the MB vendors.... Agreed. And we have not. CONFIG_MAX_SIBLINGS is not defined. A better explanation is that we had fundamental code cleanups that conflict with the current CAR implementation. In particular look at k8_init_and_stop_secondaries() from patch 4/16. It dramatically reduces the code duplication in auto.c by factoring out a common function. It was felt that maintainable code was preferable to an optional feature. The problem is that our method of detecting an init in early_mtrr_init_detected() while general purpose doesn't work if you have already played with the mttrs as the CAR code does. So either a new technique init detection is needed or we need to pass in a flag. It should only be a few days work to fix the CAR code, to work with the greatly simplified code base. There was also a practical concern with the CAR in that you cannot test changes to it except by flashing fallback which is contrary to the spirit of fallback/normal image separation. Again all minor practical problems, and not a criticism on the technique itself. Eric

3 3

[LinuxBIOS] [Fwd: Re: LACIS 2005: LinuxBIOS Summit registrations (fwd)]
by Ronald G Minnich 06 Sep '05

06 Sep '05

if you're coming, you had best register. We have fewer registrations than we hoped for ... note that we're going to have a pretty good vendor presence, and also will be describing new developments in linuxbios. thanks ron

2 1

[LinuxBIOS] I'm alive..
by windex 06 Sep '05

06 Sep '05

HI folks, Just a quick note that I'm still alive. If I have some time, I'll try to start contributing to the wiki again. I was reminded of what was going on by someone who hunted me down over MSN via my personal site (from my users page). The company I was working for had some financial problems, which led to me being very busy for awhile, then practically doing nothing, then canned for lack of resources. If anyone has any interest in providing some financial support for me to spend time working on documentation again, I'd be willing to listen. :) Otherwise, I'm trying to run my own company and pick up customers and that's taking nearly all of my free time at the moment. I'm back on the mailing list now, though, and hope to have my mortage payment covered in a stable way soon enough to get back to helping out. Talk to you guys later, Justin (jdarby @ linuxbios.org wiki)

1 0

RE: [LinuxBIOS] LNXI Merge: lnxi-patch-15/16
by Lu, Yinghai 06 Sep '05

06 Sep '05

>There was also a practical concern with the CAR in that you cannot >test changes to it except by flashing fallback which is contrary to >the spirit of fallback/normal image separation. I never tried out by change option use cmos_util to get boot normal to fallback. I mean if I change option in CMOS from fallack to normal. The system will always in normal, until I clear the CMOS. YH

2 1

RE: [LinuxBIOS] LNXI Merge: lnxi-patch-06/16
by Lu, Yinghai 06 Sep '05

06 Sep '05

This is first time for Jason to commit change for LNXI. So please don't worry about it. Sometime ago, someone total busted the tree, and it still be recoverd.... You can always challenge other's code if you are right. That is open source so it could reach more better code.... Regards Yinghai Lu

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] mmx problems on VIA EPIA-SP resolved
by Doug Bell 06 Sep '05

06 Sep '05

We are working on VIA EPIA-SP with C3-2 processsor and have resolved problems related to the use of the mmx as seen in the auto.inc. The code was hanging unless we used -mno-mmx in Config.lb. We then modified /src/cpu/via/model_centaur_init.c cpu_table[] to include {X86_VENDOR_CENTAUR, 0698}, // VIA C3 Nehemiah If anyone else is doing work on this board please let us know! Our code isn't far enough along to check in. Some questions remain: 1) Is the C3-2 supported yet? What's needed to add? 2) Which if any of the LinuxBIOS v2 via boards ( epia, epia-m ) in subversion are building AND booting? Has anyone done DRAM init using SPD under v2? Doug Bell - NXTV

3 2

[LinuxBIOS] LNXI merge: lnxi-patch-00/16
by Jason Schildt 06 Sep '05

06 Sep '05

All, I've taken the ill-fated merge attempt from a few weeks ago and have reworked it into 16 smaller, logical patches. I've also made certain that in the end, when all patches are applied all of the touched boards will build. Each patch I submit will consist of a brief description of what was changed and why, as well as a diffstat and the patch itself. I'll start submitting the diffs for review. --jason-- -- Jason W. Schildt LinuxBIOS Software Engineer Linux Networx

2 2

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot September 2005