coreboot November 2013

coreboot@coreboot.org

53 participants
117 discussions

Re: [coreboot] No VGA output on e350m1 after flashing. what to do?

by Reiner Luett

Hi! On 30.06.2013 19:28, Christian Weinz wrote: > Maybe I didn't include the VGA option in the make menuconfig process. > How can I solve this problem? You need to add the VGA Option ROM (VGA BIOS -> Add VGA BIOS image). I've extracted it from the UEFI, but you also could use these: http://www.coreboot.org/index.php?title=ASRock_E350M1&oldid=11114 at the end of the page or you also may be able to use the default AMD fam14 (Persimmon) vbios. You will need to agree to the click through: http://wwwd.amd.com/support/vbioslic.nsf/userverify?openform http://www.coreboot.org/AMD_DB-FT1_PERSIMMON It's a pity, that bios_extract didn't work for now. You could use the AMI Aptio EFI MMTool with wine: http://win-lite.de/benutzer/fernando/BIOS-Tools/AMI_Aptio_EFI_MMTool_v4.50.… You need to extract OntarioEFIVbios with PCI ID 1002,9802 as Option ROM. Regards, Reiner --

4 years, 4 months

#95: Run coreboot in VirtualBox

by coreboot

#95: Run coreboot in VirtualBox ---------------------------------+------------------------------------------ Reporter: uwe | Owner: somebody Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Component: misc | Version: Keywords: | Dependencies: Patchstatus: there is no patch | ---------------------------------+------------------------------------------ It would be nice if we could test coreboot images in VirtualBox, see http://virtualbox.org/. VirtualBox does not (yet) provide a simple mechanism to use a different BIOS in their emulated machines (something like "-L" in qemu). Instead the BIOS image (a custom bochs BIOS + LGPL'g VGABIOS) is converted to C code (an array of bytes, or the like) and merged into the VirtualBox executable. The relevant files are {{{ src/VBox/Devices/PC/DevPcBios.cpp bldprogs/bin2c.c }}} if someone want to hack VirtualBox to easily support using coreboot images instead of their usual BIOS. -- Ticket URL: <http://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/ticket/95> coreboot <http://www.coreboot.org/>

7 years, 1 month

EHCI debug port finder

by Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

I wanted to know which physical port of my multiple USB controllers have the debug capability. There was no way to find that easily, so I created a tool which will do most of the work for the user. Example output: The following PCI devices support a USB debug port (says lspci): 0000:00:1d.7 The following PCI devices support a USB debug port (says the kernel): 0000:00:1d.7 PCI device 0000:00:1d.7, USB bus 3, USB physical port 1 Currently connected high-speed devices: /: Bus 03.Port 1: Dev 1, Class=root_hub, Driver=ehci_hcd/6p, 480M |__ Port 2: Dev 20, If 0, Class=stor., Driver=usb-storage, 480M The output can be improved, but it's a good start. Regards, Carl-Daniel -- http://www.hailfinger.org/

7 years, 7 months

Dual SPI Flash adapter attempt 2.0

by Oliver Schinagl

Hi list(s), Here's my second attempt at routing the previously mailed png of my schema. It was a lot trickier to route then my previous version, but I think it worked out! As mentioned, S1 and S2 need to be shorted if U3 is to be omitted. RN1 should be 10k or ideally 100k, as Peter mentioned earlier. Hopefully there's no obvious mistakes and can start working on alternative layouts (so it is insert-able in different angles). DRC Check fails on S1, S2 and U3. It thinks the distance is to shallow. That said, DRC check passes when I set the copper width/distance to 7mil's instead of the current 8 mils. I'm planning on having these PCB's manufactured by Seeed studio and their minimal width is much smaller. Minimum trace width: 6mil Minimum trace/vias/pads space : 6mil Minimum silkscreen width : 4mil Minimum silkscreen text size : 32mil I've used a grid size of 10mil and distances of 8 mils, as I didn't want to rely on the minimum of seed. The silkscreen I positioned using a grid size of 5 mil's however. Not sure what they mean with a 'minimum silkscreen text size' however. Anyhow, feedback greatly appreciated, so I can start working on alternative layouts :)

7 years, 10 months

fixed AMD SPI speed settings (leading to problems on E350M1/USB3)

by Stefan Tauner

Hi, andor reported a problem where flashrom does reproducibly not work with coreboot but does with the vendor BIOS http://paste.flashrom.org/view.php?id=1614 Apparently it is related to fast reads and/or the frequency. We have forced the fastReadEnable bit in the SPI_Cntrl0 from 1 to 0 and also set NormSpeed in SPI_Cntrl1 to 16.5 Mhz (previously was 0 i.e. 66 MHz) in flashrom and the problem vanished. Coreboot hard codes the fast read setting in src/southbridge/amd/cimx/sb800/bootblock.c: static void enable_spi_fast_mode(void) { u8 byte; u32 dword; device_t dev = PCI_DEV(0, 0x14, 0x03); // set temp MMIO base volatile u32 *spi_base = (void *)0xa0000000; u32 save = pci_io_read_config32(dev, 0xa0); pci_io_write_config32(dev, 0xa0, (u32) spi_base | 2); // early enable of SPI 33 MHz fast mode read byte = spi_base[3]; spi_base[3] = (byte & ~(3 << 14)) | (1 << 14); spi_base[0] = spi_base[0] | (1 << 18); // fast read enable pci_io_write_config32(dev, 0xa0, save); } Marc suggested that this should be configurable in the devicetree or by a kconfig setting. Also, the statements using "byte" do not make a lot of sense to me. Shouldn't that be a u32 instead? The public documentation of the fastReadEnable is lacking any detail and I don't have access to the NDAed version of the RRG. Is my theory correct that the controller uses the 0x0B opcode with a fixed frequency (33 MHz?) instead of 0x03 with the frequency set by NormSpeed? -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner

7 years, 11 months

#186: 3com 3c905tx / gpxe boot problem

by coreboot

#186: 3com 3c905tx / gpxe boot problem -----------------------------------+---------------------------------- Reporter: jeroenkrabbendam@… | Owner: stepan@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: Component: coreboot | Keywords: gpxe Dependencies: | Patch Status: there is no patch -----------------------------------+---------------------------------- Although (or: just because) novice in the field, I encountered some problems with netbooting with coreboot. Mobo's tried: Asus P2B, VTech with bios id ITE8671-2A69KV3IC-00. All mobo's boot '''harddisk''' fine with Asus P2B / Gigabyte GA-6BX{CE} respectively. NIC ROM is started, and loads the kernel by tftp. This is vvvveeeerrrryyy slow! Although loading, the kernel is never able to start itself. Same kernel on HDU is no problem at all (GRUB2) Note: the gpxe-image is on the nic, coreboot payload is seabios. -- Ticket URL: <https://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/ticket/186> coreboot <http://www.coreboot.org/>

8 years

Re: [coreboot] BadBIOS Thoughts

by Alex G.

On 11/20/2013 09:23 AM, ron minnich wrote: > I've got a student coming in January and he's going to work on > ChromeOS on AMD CPUs, starting with the Gizmo. If, at that time, > someone has a suggestion for an AMD laptop which might be suitable, > let me know. Would you care to elaborate on that? As much as I hate HP, they do seem to have some of the best AMD-based laptops. I would look at the ProBook 655 G1 / 645 G1 or the HP ProBook 6475b. Alex P.S. One fornicating annoying downside is that HP's firmware really sucks. Suspend-and-not-crash-and-overheat (TM) is sometimes working, while Resume-and-not-defecate (TM) seems to be slightly more reliable.

8 years

google/butterfly: Erratic touchpad behavior in cold weather

by mrnuke

Have any of you noticed this with the Pavilion 14 Chromebook? You take it outside from the warm house, open the lid to resume, and the mouse pointer moves heratically. It becomes impossible to co control, and the only way to bring it back to sanity is to completely power off. When the system comes back on, the issue is gone. Alex

8 years, 1 month

Lenovo X201i

by Chris Mailer

Hello Coreboot, I would like to play around with Coreboot on a Lenovo X201i convertible laptop. According to http://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Motherboards#Laptops and some wiki-entries Coreboot does do well on the X201. Does this imply Coreboot will do on a X201i (<-note the "i"), as to my knowledge the only difference between these two versions is that the latter one features a multitouch touchscreen? Thank you in advance! Chris

8 years, 1 month

Re: [coreboot] looking for a good, small, low power, portable board

by Patrick Georgi

Am Freitag, den 29.11.2013, 19:31 -0800 schrieb ron minnich: > James, this is super helpful and, yes, I should have said 8169. Seems > like the gizmo ought to work for my needs as well, then, if the > ethernet IP is from the rtl8169? On http://www.gizmosphere.org/why-gizmo/gizmoboard/ hold your mouse over the PCB picture at the bottom, a bit below the VGA port. Somewhere you'll mouse over "Realtek RTL8111DL Gigabit Ethernet controller (on back)". So It's actually a separate chip, since the AMD on-chip stuff seems to be a not very useful broadcom chip. (see Jens' comments on gerrit: http://review.coreboot.org/#/c/2581/) Most AMD boards seem to use a separate chip, usually realtek, for that reason. Patrick

8 years, 1 month

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot November 2013