Is there a patch with the remaining bits of Yinghai's MCP55 patch? I'm
bringing up an MCP55 board and this would be a good opportunity to try
to get the code working.
--Ed
#63: make flashrom work on Iwill DK8-HTX
---------------------------------------------------+------------------------
Reporter: stuge | Owner: somebody
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: code | Version: v2
Keywords: flashrom iwill dk8-htx flash enable | Dependencies:
Patchstatus: patch needs review |
---------------------------------------------------+------------------------
flashrom does not work after booting LinuxBIOS on the Iwill DK8-HTX board,
according to mcqmcqmcq(a)fastmail.fm.
--
Ticket URL: <http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/63>
LinuxBIOS <http://www.linuxbios.org/>
#61: Add mtrr support for pentium m cpus
-----------------------------------------------------+----------------------
Reporter: Jon Dufresne <jon.dufresne(a)gmail.com> | Owner: somebody
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: code | Version: v2
Keywords: | Dependencies:
Patchstatus: patch needs review |
-----------------------------------------------------+----------------------
For cache to work the x86_setup_mtrrs() must be called. My cache would not
work without adding this to the cpu/intel/model_*/model_*_init.c file. My
cpu is a model_6dx I added this line to the other cpu's but only tested
model_6dx (that is the only one I have). However, they should work.
--
Ticket URL: <http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/61>
LinuxBIOS <http://www.linuxbios.org/>
#31: Do proper checking for flash erase for SST FWH parts
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Reporter: stepan | Owner: stepan
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Enhance the flashrom utility
Component: flashrom | Version: v2
Keywords: | Include_gantt: 0
Dependencies: | Due_assign: MM/DD/YYYY
Due_close: MM/DD/YYYY |
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Instead of checking the first byte only, the whole part is checked now.
This will detect any improper erase. The patch removes a FIXME. :-)
Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer <stepan(a)coresystems.de>
--
Ticket URL: <http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/31>
LinuxBIOS <http://www.linuxbios.org/>
#46: Clarify LinuxBIOS vs. OpenBIOS vs. Open Firmware vs. EFI vs. GNUFI etc.
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reporter: uwe | Owner: somebody
Type: task | Status: new
Priority: critical | Milestone: Going mainstream
Component: wiki/website/tracker | Version: v2
Keywords: | Due_close: MM/DD/YYYY
Include_gantt: 0 | Dependencies:
Due_assign: MM/DD/YYYY | Patchstatus: there is no patch
--------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
There seems to be a lot of confusion about LinuxBIOS itself in the
"general public", but also when it comes to comparing LinuxBIOS to similar
projects and systems, e.g. OpenBIOS, Open Firmware, EFI, GNUFI, uboot,
etc. etc.
We should have an easily understandable (for non-techsavvy people) entry
in the FAQ which outlines what all those projects are about, their goals,
pros, and cons.
--
Ticket URL: <http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/46>
LinuxBIOS <http://www.linuxbios.org/>
#64: Epia-M COM2 does not work
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Reporter: stepan | Owner: somebody
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: code | Version: v2
Keywords: | Dependencies:
Patchstatus: there is no patch |
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
COM2 is not initialized correctly on the Via Epia-M. It looks like 2090
broke it:
[http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/changeset?old_path=trunk%2FLinu…
diff of the superio changes in 2090]
--
Ticket URL: <http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/64>
LinuxBIOS <http://www.linuxbios.org/>
#66: Merge all debug.c instances
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Reporter: uwe | Owner: somebody
Type: defect | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: Cosmetic fixes
Component: code | Version: v2
Keywords: | Dependencies:
Patchstatus: there is no patch |
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
There are a ton of very similar and even identical debug.c files in
LinuxBIOSv2. We should put one version into src/lib/debug.c or so, and use
that from all mainboards...
--
Ticket URL: <http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/66>
LinuxBIOS <http://www.linuxbios.org/>
#65: Unify SuperIO code?
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
Reporter: stepan | Owner: somebody
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: minor | Milestone: Cosmetic fixes
Component: code | Version: v2
Keywords: | Dependencies:
Patchstatus: there is no patch |
---------------------------------+------------------------------------------
One thing I've been noticing in the current superio implementations: A lot
of differences come from having the part names used in variable and macro
names.
{{{
#define FDC37M60X_CONFIG_REG_CC 0x02
}}}
Maybe we should change that to some unique names
{{{
#define SUPERIO_CONFIG_REG_CC 0x02
}}}
* Those names are usually file local only, so name clashes wont be a
problem
* They are the same for most (all?) SuperIOs?
Doing so (maybe with function names as well?) would unify the superio
interface, or at least make diffing the code of different devices a bit
easier..
--
Ticket URL: <http://tracker.linuxbios.org/trac/LinuxBIOS/ticket/65>
LinuxBIOS <http://www.linuxbios.org/>