coreboot January 2008

coreboot@coreboot.org

79 participants
347 discussions

SST25VF016B (2MB) flash on m57sli (IT8716F).
by Ronald Hoogenboom 20 Mar '08

20 Mar '08

I mounted a SST25VF016B 2MByte flash chip on the second SPI bios landpattern on the m57sli mobo (as per the m57sli tutorial). There as some problems with that, on the one side from the point of the LPC memory mapping options of the IT8716F (max. 512KB contiguous) and on the other side with the programming method(s) supported by the SST flash chip (only the byte-mode programming is compatible with the IT8716). Lets call them problem1 and problem2. The reason why I want the 2MB is that I would like to try direct Linux kernel as the payload. Problem1 and Problem2 have impact on the useability of flashrom, which I have sort-of solved (patch below). Problem1 also has impact on the elfboot.c and rom-stream.c in coreboot (linuxbios), which I'm still investigating (suggestions welcome!). Problem1 (for reading) is solved by NOT using the mmap method for reading the flash contents, but using outb() for sending the flash read commands (using a specific 25vf016 read function). Also the normal read command is only supported up to 25MHz by this chip, so I cannot use the 33MHz speed as used normally by spi.c. There is also a 'high speed' read command (0x0b), which inserts an extra dummy byte between address and data, but as the 8716 only allows max. 3 bytes read per io transfer, the gain (3 bytes per io transfer @ 16MHz versus 2 bytes per io transfer @ 33MHz) is negligible. Problem2 (for writing) is solved similarly: The mmap write method cannot be used effectively, because the flash chip needs a Write-enable command for each Byte-program (no block program concept in byte-program mode). The chip has a so-called AAI (auto address increment) programming mode instead, but that cannot be used with the 8716 chip, because it needs 6 byte and 3 byte io transfers, which it doesn't support (bah!). Not using the mmap writes also solves the limited LPC memory address window. So, there is also a 25vf016 specific write function. NOTE: there may be some offset because of other changes... Index: flash.h =================================================================== --- flash.h (revision 3051) +++ flash.h (working copy) @@ -297,6 +303,8 @@ void generic_spi_write_disable(); int generic_spi_chip_erase_c7(struct flashchip *flash); int generic_spi_chip_write(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf); +int sst25vf016_spi_chip_write(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf); +int sst25vf016_spi_chip_read(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf); /* 82802ab.c */ int probe_82802ab(struct flashchip *flash); Index: flashchips.c =================================================================== --- flashchips.c (revision 3051) +++ flashchips.c (working copy) @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ {"SST25VF040B", SST_ID, SST_25VF040B, 512, 256, probe_spi, generic_spi_chip_erase_c7, generic_spi_chip_write}, {"SST25VF016B", SST_ID, SST_25VF016B, 2048, 256, - probe_spi, generic_spi_chip_erase_c7, generic_spi_chip_write}, + probe_spi, generic_spi_chip_erase_c7, sst25vf016_spi_chip_write, sst25vf016_spi_chip_read}, {"SST29EE020A", SST_ID, SST_29EE020A, 256, 128, probe_jedec, erase_chip_jedec, write_jedec}, {"SST28SF040A", SST_ID, SST_28SF040, 512, 256, Index: spi.c =================================================================== --- spi.c (revision 3051) +++ spi.c (working copy) @@ -77,6 +77,8 @@ #define JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP (0x01 << 0) uint16_t it8716f_flashport = 0; +/* use fast 33MHz SPI (<>0) or slow 16MHz (0) */ +int fast_spi=1; void generic_spi_prettyprint_status_register(struct flashchip *flash); @@ -203,10 +205,10 @@ __FUNCTION__, writecnt); return 1; } - /* Start IO, 33MHz, readcnt input bytes, writecnt output bytes. Note: + /* Start IO, 33MHz (or 16), readcnt input bytes, writecnt output bytes. Note: * We can't use writecnt directly, but have to use a strange encoding. */ - outb((0x5 << 4) | ((readcnt & 0x3) << 2) | (writeenc), port); + outb(((0x4+(fast_spi?1:0)) << 4) | ((readcnt & 0x3) << 2) | (writeenc), port); do { busy = inb(port) & 0x80; } while (busy); @@ -314,6 +316,39 @@ "%sset\n", (status & (1 << 0)) ? "" : "not "); } +/* Prettyprint the status register. Works for + * SST 25VF016 + */ +void generic_spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25vf016(uint8_t status) +{ + const char *bpt[]={ + "none", + "1F0000H-1FFFFFH", + "1E0000H-1FFFFFH", + "1C0000H-1FFFFFH", + "180000H-1FFFFFH", + "100000H-1FFFFFH", + "all","all" + }; + printf_debug("Chip status register: Block Protect Write Disable " + "(BPL) is %sset\n", (status & (1 << 7)) ? "" : "not "); + printf_debug("Chip status register: Auto Address Increment Programming " + "(AAI) is %sset\n", (status & (1 << 6)) ? "" : "not "); + printf_debug("Chip status register: Bit 5 (BP3) is " + "%sset\n", (status & (1 << 5)) ? "" : "not "); + printf_debug("Chip status register: Bit 4 (BP2) is " + "%sset\n", (status & (1 << 4)) ? "" : "not "); + printf_debug("Chip status register: Bit 3 (BP1) is " + "%sset\n", (status & (1 << 3)) ? "" : "not "); + printf_debug("Chip status register: Bit 2 (BP0) is " + "%sset\n", (status & (1 << 2)) ? "" : "not "); + printf_debug("Resulting block protection : %s\n", bpt[(status&0x1c)>>2]); + printf_debug("Chip status register: Write Enable Latch (WEL) is " + "%sset\n", (status & (1 << 1)) ? "" : "not "); + printf_debug("Chip status register: Write In Progress (BUSY) is " + "%sset\n", (status & (1 << 0)) ? "" : "not "); +} + void generic_spi_prettyprint_status_register(struct flashchip *flash) { uint8_t status; @@ -326,6 +361,10 @@ if ((flash->model_id & 0xff00) == 0x2000) generic_spi_prettyprint_status_register_st_m25p(status); break; + case SST_ID: + if (flash->model_id == SST_25VF016B) + generic_spi_prettyprint_status_register_sst25vf016(status); + break; } } @@ -392,7 +431,7 @@ generic_spi_write_enable(); outb(0x06 , it8716f_flashport + 1); - outb((3 << 4), it8716f_flashport); + outb(((2+(fast_spi?1:0)) << 4), it8716f_flashport); for (i = 0; i < 256; i++) { bios[256 * block + i] = buf[256 * block + i]; } @@ -410,6 +449,94 @@ it8716f_spi_page_program(block, buf, bios); } +/* + * This is according the SST25VF016 datasheet, who knows it is more + * generic that this... + */ +void sst25vf016_spi_write_status_register(int status) +{ + const unsigned char cmd[] = {0x01,(unsigned char)status}; + + /* Send WRSR (Write Status Register) */ + generic_spi_command(2, 0, cmd, NULL); + +} + +void sst25vf016_spi_byte_program(int address, uint8_t byte) +{ + const unsigned char cmd[5] = {0x02, + (address>>16)&0xff, + (address>>8)&0xff, + (address>>0)&0xff, + byte + }; + + /* Send Byte-Program */ + generic_spi_command(5, 0, cmd, NULL); + +} + +/* + * IT8716F only allows maximum of 512 kb SPI mapped to LPC memory cycles + * Program chip using firmware cycle byte programming. (SLOW!) + */ +int sst25vf016_spi_chip_write(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf) +{ + int total_size = 1024 * flash->total_size; + uint8_t status; + int i; + fast_spi=0; + + status = generic_spi_read_status_register(); + /* If there is block protection in effect, unprotect it first. */ + if ((status&0x3c)!=0) { + printf_debug("Some block protection in effect, disabling\n"); + generic_spi_write_enable(); + sst25vf016_spi_write_status_register(status&~0x3c); + } + for (i=0; i<total_size; i++) { + generic_spi_write_enable(); + sst25vf016_spi_byte_program(i,buf[i]); + //while (generic_spi_read_status_register() & JEDEC_RDSR_BIT_WIP) + usleep(10); + if (i%1024==0) fputc('b',stderr); + } + /* resume normal ops... */ + outb(0x20, it8716f_flashport); + return 0; +} + +void sst25vf016_spi_3byte_read(int address, uint8_t *bytes, int len) +{ + const unsigned char cmd[5] = {0x03, + (address>>16)&0xff, + (address>>8)&0xff, + (address>>0)&0xff, + }; + + /* Send Read */ + generic_spi_command(4, len, cmd, bytes); + +} + +/* + * IT8716F only allows maximum of 512 kb SPI mapped to LPC memory cycles + * Need to read this big flash using firmware cycles 3 byte at a time. + */ +int sst25vf016_spi_chip_read(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf) +{ + int total_size = 1024 * flash->total_size; + int i; + fast_spi=0; + + for (i = 0; i < total_size; i+=3) { + int toread=3; + if (total_size-i < toread) toread=total_size-i; + sst25vf016_spi_3byte_read(i, buf+i, toread); + } + return 0; +} + int generic_spi_chip_write(struct flashchip *flash, uint8_t *buf) { int total_size = 1024 * flash->total_size; int i;

9 80

LinuxTag 2008 in Berlin, May 28-31
by Peter Stuge 19 Mar '08

19 Mar '08

The Call for Projects has been released. http://www.linuxtag.org/2008/de/community/projects/cfpro.html http://www.linuxtag.org/2008/en/community/projects/cfpro/call-for-projects.… Applications must be in before February 21st. I think we did OK last year, but if we do a bit more careful planning and preparations I think this year can be much better. The organizers expressed interest in a much larger and better advertised workshop-type event where we would help people get coreboot working on their systems. I am certainly interested in exhibiting coreboot. Anyone else? //Peter

6 16

[LinuxBIOS] Request for superiotool dump support: SMSC LPC47M192
by Corey Osgood 10 Mar '08

10 Mar '08

Hey guys, I've been looking through the datasheet on this chip, and I've got no idea where the values you use come from. I know some of you have been adding dump support to various chips just for the sake of having them (which is a good thing, and I'm glad you're doing it), so I was hoping you might be able to do this one while you're at it. Thanks, Corey

4 10

[LinuxBIOS] W39V040BPZ or vt8237. Flashing problems.
by Adam Talbot 04 Mar '08

04 Mar '08

Have three motherboards running cn700, VT8237 chips set. All three boards have W39V040BPZ bios chips. I can not program them with flashrom. Flashrom see the chip as W39V040B. Flashrom start on the flash and just sits there. When flashed with the -V option I can see the memory address is not changing. But, big problem is the fact that the chip does get a bit flashed, as, I can no longer boot. So there is something happening. Looking at the data sheet for the W39V040B, all the PZ gives me is the PLCC package and lead free. So, is this a problem with the vt8237 south bridge? Where should I go to start debugging? -Adam

6 19

[PATCH] Rename lxbios to nvramtool
by Uwe Hermann 01 Mar '08

01 Mar '08

See patch. This is step 1 in a three-step commit: 1. Apply patch, commit. 2. Rename some files: $ svn mv lxbios.c nvramtool.c $ svn mv lxbios.1 nvramtool.c $ svn mv lxbios.spec nvramtool.spec $ svn ci 3. Rename lxbios directory: $ svn mv lxbios/ nvramtool/ $ svn ci If I get an ACK for the patch, I'll do steps 2 and 3 also, right after comitting the patch. Additionally, the wiki page http://www.coreboot.org/Lxbios will then be moved to http://www.coreboot.org/nvramtool. Uwe. -- http://www.hermann-uwe.de | http://www.holsham-traders.de http://www.crazy-hacks.org | http://www.unmaintained-free-software.org

5 13

GENFADT and GENDSDT
by Urbez Santana Roma 01 Mar '08

01 Mar '08

I have not found one tool that can obtain the fadt.c and dsdt.c from the machine trough /proc/acpi/fadt and /proc/acpi/dsdt I have write the two utitilities, if one needs it. Urbez. NOTE: you can compile the tools simply written "make genfadt" and "make gendsdt"

7 28

[LinuxBIOS] starting ACPI implementation for m57sli
by Andreas B. Mundt 25 Feb '08

25 Feb '08

Hi everybody! Following http://linuxbios.org/ACPI_in_LinuxBIOS I tried to implement some basic ACPI functionality for the ga-m57sli. It compiles now, but linux doesn't boot anymore, I guess there is some irq routing wrong (I took all from the a8v-e_se; thanks to Rudolf Marek). I'm an absolute newcomer to the field, so please do not expect to much from the patch. Perhaps someone else can be motivated, and/or use it as starting point for a thorough implementation. (Or, of course, give a hint what's going wrong). Thanks, Andi

6 7

Re: [LinuxBIOS] Intel microcode revision code
by ron minnich 20 Feb '08

20 Feb '08

On Dec 12, 2007 12:28 AM, <Martin.Karlsson(a)emerson.com> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > Yesterday I wrote some code for the Syslinux boot loader that is meant to > boot different images based on which revision of the CPU microcode that is > currently loaded in the CPU (yes, this is a bit strange but we have a very > good reason for it). I then compared my implementation with a few others an > ran across yours, in > http://www.openbios.org/viewvc/trunk/LinuxBIOSv2/src/cpu/intel/microcode/mi… > > Question to you guys: why is the first wrmsr instruction there? From my > understanding, by not properly initialising ECX, EAX and EDX this will > overwrite whatever is in the MSR pointed to by ECX?! > > BTW I tried out your code on our target hardware (Intel Celeron M, 600 MHz) > and with that first wrmsr line in place it hangs and without it, it runs > just fine. > Thanks Martin. That looks like quite a nice bug catch you've done :-) We'll have to figure out if this code was ever (a) used and (b) worked :-) Thanks again, this is great! ron

5 7

[LinuxBIOS] [PATCH] fix port 0 on sata controller 0 for ck804 based boards
by Ward Vandewege 20 Feb '08

20 Feb '08

Hi all, There is a problem with the ck804 code in the tree when it comes to SATA support. I've observed this on a tyan s2891, and it has been confirmed by folks with a sun ultra40. This patch changes the southbridge/nvidia/ck804/ck804_early_setup.c file and enables one extra SATA port. I've tested this on real hardware (tyan s2891). There is a very similar file called southbridge/nvidia/ck804/ck804_early_setup_car.c which seems to be used by tyan/s2895 sunw/ultra40 I don't have access to a s2895, but YH thinks that all sata ports should work on that board. It would be great if someone could verify that. I'm not 100% sure why both the ck804_early_setup.c and the ck804_early_setup_car.c file are included in the mainboards/sunw/ultra40/ tree; probably only one of those files is actually used. I've spent quite a bit of time with 'dumpio' and tried to match register values between the proprietary BIOS and LinuxBIOS, but to no avail. If someone has ideas to get port 1 working on both sata controllers, that would be great. Thanks, Ward. -- Ward Vandewege <ward(a)fsf.org> Free Software Foundation - Senior System Administrator

5 8

x86emu boot message
by joe＠smittys.pointclark.net 18 Feb '08

18 Feb '08

Can anyone help me why I am getting this boot message from x86emu?? halt_sys: file /home/joe/coreboot-v2/src/devices/emulator/x86emu/ops.c, line 4387 Thanks - Joe

5 6

Jump to page:

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 2008