coreboot January 2006

coreboot@coreboot.org

38 participants
64 discussions

Re: [LinuxBIOS] small 64bit initrd
by Lu, Yinghai 11 Jan '06

11 Jan '06

Good, I will look at the kboot. Is it ok that first kernel is 64 bit and kboot is 32bit? Or in other words the initrd is 32 bit and kexec tools is 32 bit? YH -----Original Message----- From: ebiederman(a)lnxi.com [mailto:ebiederman@lnxi.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 12:52 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: linuxbios(a)openbios.org; Fastboot mailing list; kboot-general(a)lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: small 64bit initrd "Lu, Yinghai" <yinghai.lu(a)amd.com> writes: > Any progress about small size 64bit initrd? > > I'm using suse 91 rescure initrd, it is about 18M (gzip -9)... Which is clearly painful, and way overkill. First you asked the wrong question looking from an initrd with a 64bit user space. Even for a 64bit kernel you don't need a 64bit user space and 32bit is smaller and more common. Second you looked in the wrong place. What you want is: http://kboot.sourceforge.net/ The intro page lists kboot-9 as being only 39K. I think that is just the kboot part but it might be the entire initrd. Using uclibc I am certain it is below 1M. Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to build it yet. (Sorry Werner). Check it out just skimming through the documentation it looks like it has already surpassed FILO in capabilities. Eric

1 0

Re: [LinuxBIOS] The full "How to"
by Lu, Yinghai 11 Jan '06

11 Jan '06

The sc520 one. -----Original Message----- From: linuxbios-bounces(a)linuxbios.org [mailto:linuxbios-bounces@linuxbios.org] On Behalf Of Ronald G Minnich Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 12:41 PM To: Adam Talbot Cc: linuxbios(a)openbios.org Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] The full "How to" you could try the linux journal articles for a start. Did you see them? ron -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios(a)linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] Anybody having success with EPIA 800? (was Re: EPIA halting after vt8601 init?)
by Hacen Aissaoui 11 Jan '06

11 Jan '06

Hello, Sorry to come back on this old thread but I would greatly appreciate if anyone could update the info discussed in it. Is the SDRAM CAS latency parameter the only issue with EPIA 800 ? Does the newest version of LB adapt itself to different SDRAMs ? Finally, Al, you were talking about : "keeping track of what it takes to get this going on EPIA, so I can post it for others in the future, this will be good to know." Could you kindly share your tracks with the EPIA 800 ? Thanks Hacen ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : téléphonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger. Appelez le monde entier à partir de 0,012 /minute ! Téléchargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com

3 3

Re: [LinuxBIOS] copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() and non-smp
by Lu, Yinghai 09 Jan '06

09 Jan '06

Commited. -----Original Message----- From: Richard Smith [mailto:smithbone@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 11:05 AM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: LinuxBIOS Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() and non-smp On 1/9/06, Lu, Yinghai <yinghai.lu(a)amd.com> wrote: > I want to use wrapper one... > > #if CONFIG_SMP==1 > copy..... > #endif Ok. Thats the current fix I have. -- Richard A. Smith

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] Fwd: [issue55] move mptable to 960k to 1M
by yhlu 09 Jan '06

09 Jan '06

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Yinghai Lu <lxbios(a)openbios.org> Date: Jan 9, 2006 1:04 PM Subject: [issue55] move mptable to 960k to 1M To: ollie(a)lanl.gov, rminnich(a)lanl.gov, stepan(a)openbios.org, yinghailu(a)gmail.com Yinghai Lu <yinghailu(a)gmail.com> added the comment: 1. check if mptable cross 0x467 2a. the mpc small than 64k, will move that to 960K-1M 2b. if mpc big than 64k, will move that from 0x500 3. mpf will put on low table, so the kernel can find it. Please use this one instead of 010706_mv_mptable_high.diff ---------- status: unread -> chatting ________________________________________________ LinuxBIOS issue tracker <lxbios(a)openbios.org> <https://openbios.org/roundup/linuxbios/issue55> ________________________________________________

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] CAR and PIII celeron?
by Richard Smith 09 Jan '06

09 Jan '06

What do I need to do to see if CAR will work on the PIII celeron? -- Richard A. Smith

3 3

Re: [LinuxBIOS] copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() and non-smp
by Lu, Yinghai 09 Jan '06

09 Jan '06

I want to use wrapper one... #if CONFIG_SMP==1 copy..... #endif YH -----Original Message----- From: linuxbios-bounces(a)linuxbios.org [mailto:linuxbios-bounces@linuxbios.org] On Behalf Of Richard Smith Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 8:24 AM To: LinuxBIOS Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() and non-smp > > Yh Lu, this is your patch that broke things, I assume you will fix? > I don't mind fixing it. (I already have for my tree) I just don't know which fix is prefered. Either add a wrapper around the call or pull the definition out and make it compile to a empty function like it does when _RAMBASE is set to a large value. -- Richard A. Smith -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios(a)linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios

2 1

Re: [LinuxBIOS] copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() and non-smp
by Lu, Yinghai 09 Jan '06

09 Jan '06

I agree. YH -----Original Message----- From: linuxbios-bounces(a)linuxbios.org [mailto:linuxbios-bounces@linuxbios.org] On Behalf Of Richard Smith Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 10:45 PM To: LinuxBIOS Subject: [LinuxBIOS] copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() and non-smp While merging in my 440bx patchs to the latest revision I got unresolved references to the copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() function. if CONFIG_SMP != 1 then this function never gets defined but initialize_cpus() calls it regardless. Will copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() ever be used in the non-smp case? If so then it needs a CONFIG_SMP wrapper or needs to get defined as empty in the #else case of CONFIG_SMP. -- Richard A. Smith -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios(a)linuxbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios

1 0

[LinuxBIOS] copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() and non-smp
by Richard Smith 09 Jan '06

09 Jan '06

While merging in my 440bx patchs to the latest revision I got unresolved references to the copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() function. if CONFIG_SMP != 1 then this function never gets defined but initialize_cpus() calls it regardless. Will copy_secondary_start_to_1m_below() ever be used in the non-smp case? If so then it needs a CONFIG_SMP wrapper or needs to get defined as empty in the #else case of CONFIG_SMP. -- Richard A. Smith

3 4

[LinuxBIOS] any chance to get X fbdev driver to work ?
by Christian Sühs 09 Jan '06

09 Jan '06

Hey, and Happy X-Mas for all For non working Bootsplash with vesafb and LinuxBios I use the Viafb from Epia2 patch Kernel 2.4.25. Now Bootsplash works, with a little trick in the bootsplash sources :D But I'm not able to bring up a XServer with fbdev as driver. The system hangs without any errors. It seems the problem is the viafb inside the Kernel. Unfortunatly, I have the same problem with orginal Bios. Furthermore, the X via driver does not work with the LinuxBios system. I get an VGA_Bios checksum failure. With original Bios it works. I have had a look on the X Via driver sources. The file called via_bios.c (search for checksum) It seems the routine looks on 0xc0000 for a valid vga_bios, all other checks before are verified as true. Only the last check fails. I have tried to start X without Bios Callbacks, but fail. Is there any solution. It should be a valid bios on 0xc0000, the checksum routine is a loop about 65536 bytes. the result must be zero. As I create the vga bios, I have fill up the rest with OO to 65536. Is that the problem? Should I fill up with FF? chris

5 26

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot January 2006