coreboot May 2014

coreboot@coreboot.org

39 participants
89 discussions

HEAD isn't compiling with CONFIG_ANY_TOOLCHAIN
by Sean McNeil 10 May '14

10 May '14

Up until recently, compiling coreboot with the options CONFIG_COMPILER_GCC=y CONFIG_ANY_TOOLCHAIN=y on a 64-bit linux system worked just fine. Over the last few days I now get the errors: make Warning: no suitable GCC for armv7. Warning: no suitable GCC for aarch64. /bin/sh: -print-libgcc-file-name: command not found /bin/sh: -print-libgcc-file-name: command not found /bin/sh: -print-libgcc-file-name: command not found /bin/sh: -print-libgcc-file-name: command not found /bin/sh: -print-libgcc-file-name: command not found /bin/sh: -print-libgcc-file-name: command not found # # configuration written to .config # make: *** No rule to make target `build/cbfs/fallback/bootblock.bin', needed by `build/coreboot.pre1'. Stop.

2 1

No CBMEM console available for QEMU
by Paul Menzel 10 May '14

10 May '14

Dear coreboot folks, building coreboot for the target QEMU x86 q35/ich9 (aka qemu -M q35, since v1.4) I am unable to enable CBMEM console in the Kconfig menu (`make menuconfig`). As coreboot messages should be uploaded to the board status repository and only CBMEM console is supported, I wonder how to accomplish that. Thanks, Paul

1 1

coreboot at the LinuxTag 2014 in Berlin: Visit our booth at the community day this Saturday!
by Paul Menzel 09 May '14

09 May '14

Dear coreboot folks, just a heads-up, that coreboot is at the LinuxTag 2014in hall 5, booth H02 [1], which is on the first floor. The LinuxTag this year hugely changed compared to the last years. It changed location, only lasts three days and the Droidcon also there. On Saturday is the last day and they call it community day, where a ticket costs 10 €. The demo running coreboot/SeaBIOS and KolibriOS [2] from the flash ROM on the ASRock E350M1 is quite good and visitors like it. It boots in three to four seconds, where you have to press enter twice. Big thanks to Scott to making that possible this week by sending patches to the list! Besides that it is as every year, where interested people stop by and mostly ask, if coreboot is going to run on their hardware. Big thanks to Peter for being there all three days and organizing a booth. Unfortunately I won’t be able to be there tomorrow. So enjoy and see you at next year’s LinuxTag in Berlin! Thanks, Paul [1] http://www.linuxtag.org/2014/de/ausstellung/aussteller/

2 1

CBMEM console and time stamps not working with 99ac98f7
by Paul Menzel 09 May '14

09 May '14

Dear coreboot folks, building commit 99ac98f7 [1] Introduce stage-specific architecture for coreboot for the ASRock E350M1, I noticed that neither CBMEM console nor CBMEM time stamps are saved. Could somebody please try it on another board? Thanks, Paul [1] http://review.coreboot.org/5577

1 1

Re: [coreboot] New addendums to INTEL FSP family (ron minnich)
by Patrick Georgi 09 May '14

09 May '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Am 09.05.2014 23:44, schrieb echelon(a)free.fr: > What is this "signed binary only part"? Can you elaborate please? > Is it the SPL? But, according to this U-Boot page > (https://github.com/linux-sunxi/u-boot-sunxi/wiki) "U-Boot SPL > fully replaces Allwinner boot0 & boot1".. I'm confused.. As I noted, this is third hand knowledge, but: the allwinner CPUs have a boot ROM somewhere in the chip. The code is immutable (hence ROM) and rather tiny. My mistake is two-fold: one, it's not about signed code, but about immutable one - but since it can be read, it can be analyzed, and so besides the "it's immutable so it's not software" defense, its impact is well-known. Second, after re-reading my notes I'm not quite clear if that analysis was actually conducted by "our" dev or someone else. Whatever the case, Alex certainly knows a lot of things about the Allwinner now and considers it good from a blob perspective, and I happily rely on the expert. If in doubt he knows more about that chip than I do (but he's offline for the next 10 weeks or so). Regards, Patrick -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJTbVAPAAoJEJ8j+sKG17wlz2sQAISHsilOTKcyd1ycWilPCICk 9Pken5IA6n4bXu8Gz0ojpWQf8KauahvL/0NVFS2AOBznnMgbMXHDNGMFD/CiElUJ 0DvC+p/Mpl46PE/yVktJ0MnkD5NWoti5wBx+ESybK4agRBeFBhSuypKRaVQ/zy9Z t3ezx2fikxiJfOjgRTxa575FPvSMZ1KM4IUbozV6j9MCO5liLslWkhDRtLJPuAD+ O6SE39LvpocxJtmgIFHG1rFh2wl8wW/FVtC9CVHmQ90BsvOPHRQU2Axw1RDN3dWA f5rGHg1onaTPZLwnXiVYhCTprgTazlfzSTIDAW9JZinFa3/VvwHuYk1QvFRxWpwt MIMZy9+9s3F6G3j4RB/T9afQPcJjpIKnQOoDQGnYkxRTvOFnijbgpWrswr/bC+YU WMTUpjw0EWw0eN9L/OBi3qWkNMooK/DcQzNY0Lri6EQssYnTYpEjsFMz0kdzwNv5 4pnzmGu0m+AATZGI06qNeykAEXYUnMyys2Q5EHzQ7MYFRT6b7oXia5O+7wLWeE+2 DzmOe72yyhDljTIian1//JQrLpZW0zVvrQ3bDOozJzTNlutv94WZaBXsZFrrwamr tecf5QyvPWlh4K6NVOKSI0KKCGeFo5ngdkdJLJQjA1tTJtRqm1s+wlv+tCbu/WFM TGPcvu+mDX58La+j5ACW =OEoa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: [coreboot] FSP, SNB, and a new board
by WANG FEI 09 May '14

09 May '14

Ron, The current coreboot already supported Sandy Bridge FSP, downloading a Sandy Bridge FSP form Intel website and placing it to current coreboot, it might work immediately. -Fei On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:21 PM, ron minnich <rminnich(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Oh no, I don't want to try FSP, I just want to do the thing that's the > least work for me, and it sounds like Google mrc.bin is what I want, > since I know where to find it :-) > > Thanks > > ron > > -- > coreboot mailing list: coreboot(a)coreboot.org > http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot >

1 0

Re: [coreboot] New addendums to INTEL FSP family (ron minnich)
by Patrick Georgi 09 May '14

09 May '14

Am 2014-05-07 23:57, schrieb Jiming Sun: > If open source community is meant for collaboration and innovation, do > you think there can be silicon specific code that only a few people > can understand, therefore whether it is open or not really does not > matter? It matters in that it can be checked. It also matters that fixes are possible: I had to binary patch an Intel bug in Google's MRC binary, it would have been easier to find in source code (in particular because I've been told that the comment above the point I fixed actually said the right thing. I had no comments in the binary to work with). In an open source process (with feedback loop) I could even have pushed that fix your way. As-is I have no idea who's still affected by that bug. Also, this argument only works because the data sheets are locked down. I still have some vain hope that this will change at some point, too. :-) The PC space thrived because/despite (pick your favorite) open data sheets, and the embedded space still does (see also: Quark). One more advantage open source brings is that it provides standardized licensing (and this issue is more important to commercial integrators that want to sell their work than to private developers): Mainstream open source licenses are well-known, battle-tested in courts around the world, and companies tend to have (simple) policies on using code under open source terms in products. I was recently told that the FSP license is different from the click-through license on www.intel.com/fsp (the one shown when trying to download the files). So here's how I understand the FSP license situation: There's the click-through license on the web site, the FSP license (shown by the self-extracting archive), the intersection of both that actually applies to me when using FSP, and the application of these resulting terms in jurisdictions world-wide. And every single-letter change to the license in future releases restarts the license evaluation process from scratch. This may not be a problem for Intel - it's huge so these things don't matter much, but please keep in mind that Intel's legal department alone is probably larger than many of the companies that integrate Intel's chips. So custom licensing is certainly a great scheme to keep lots of lawyers employed. But it's not so great if you're just trying to get chipset initialization code (and by extension: chipsets) into the hands of integrators. > ARM has a Boot ROM inside their SOC, should the code inside the Boot > ROM be open? or does it matter? Those tend to be small, in the 4-8kb range, and focused on a single purpose: getting the next stage into iRAM. For the Allwinner CPU we support, one developer in our community checked that the signed binary-only part (that we can't replace) is harmless. This isn't so easy with a multi-100kb binary affecting pretty much everything across multiple chips. > I know this view point is not going to be popular, but Intel is trying > hard to open as much code as possible (tianocore.org [1], Linux > drivers, and Quark firmware are a few examples; I am sure more will > come in the future). I'm certainly looking forward to that! > We believe encapsulating basic silicon code is a good idea > regardless if it is completely open. It sure is. But it's even better when it's open :-) Regards, Patrick

2 1

Re: [coreboot] FSP, SNB, and a new board
by Patrick Georgi 09 May '14

09 May '14

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Am 09.05.2014 20:14, schrieb ron minnich: > How good is the FSP code with a new board? > > I have an SNB board and I'm curious as to how much blood will be > on the walls if I try to use an FSB-based coreboot image with it. The data points collected on #coreboot indicate that you're better off with the Google mrc.bin. The data is so strong that I think there's a need to wrap FSP in an mrc.bin-style interface to localize the damage inflicted by future platforms to the poor soul that gets to work on the wrapper. But if you're truly interested in trying FSP, rest assured that I'm in no way trying to discourage you. Best regards, Patrick, intern at Aperture Science -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJTbSWQAAoJEJ8j+sKG17wllaIQAJjRCgQVHmgyi+LmMnu8Tuhu MR1Vc26vN9jbeUbaFccmWAPsPSbaeYpOECyJ1IFPm5iLvEam2LY+JyEFveInl4QX 1qCKE36f6IZ/xZYCdOGn3m1KOBhuzZWFA7ALkZaxImjdpLseIzHBX8RSxaq7IcJU XlyWztI4jghCoSWy8bSchGnzgGd8y1CltyNbxrbZAepcelORewozVORd+tQyy7QR 7DLYYHto1Azrl5V2mOWNpBCYoAgBBGb+ew6tUJpJTPLERtLCvPfqg9N58L8d2aSt W2fAztnhcXe+rFQx5TZI027hT5GImmL+xtgHGmg8OhPnAJbXJzJqiPJXXDqUvYLs aHahxSeeXuGYHiPrnT9lGGd4kZd8jhCcktG5HRU7lZZMgWStd8wQNwxqNnJIJt1B 1uwoekUwLU3FIJPrSfwwLXsL+vOKnRiJVS1+eLPB4uWTrqNcTNoKRUtW4dMRoi8J /uPScp9D9dyyLfUykfm0d1ox1kg789I6TJeo1edp/7thY3jYCjYWFElGW7ULDJya A0Y/wKmxU3cbPlKgXBF3NEjaq03b4dGywWWp0TR4nUM+RLQsnIhc6HYM2ix/d7PQ LN1ZGTeNjgFXQzpE3hHy7JbQkt5O9h193npU0aI7nQ1LOazlELxSXResm749woK1 wMsPwN9zMW0bmCbxfMqT =w9yP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

FSP, SNB, and a new board
by ron minnich 09 May '14

09 May '14

How good is the FSP code with a new board? I have an SNB board and I'm curious as to how much blood will be on the walls if I try to use an FSB-based coreboot image with it. SNB = my weird way of saying sandybridge ron

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Compling error in ubuntu 14.04
by WANG FEI 09 May '14

09 May '14

Many thanks. On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 12:41 AM, Furquan Shaikh <furquan.m.shaikh(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Hello Wang Fei, > > This CL has been submitted which fixes the issue: > http://review.coreboot.org/#/c/5701/ > > Thanks, > Furquan > > > On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 4:36 PM, WANG FEI <wangfei.jimei(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, all >> >> I noticed coreboot compiles failed on my ubuntu 14.04 since the following >> change committed. >> >> >> >> >> *Author: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com <furquan(a)google.com>> >> 2014-04-23 18:18:48 Committer: Furquan Shaikh <furquan(a)google.com >> <furquan(a)google.com>> 2014-05-06 19:23:31Parent: >> fb494d68ff92d036adf10fb7eacf97ed9f1a4391 (baytrail: gpio: Add support for >> direct / dedicated IRQs) Child: 9547f8d799829ddab9196c4e0cad644a06db49e9 >> (rambi: Add DIRQs for trackpad and touchscreen)* >> >> The compiling log as below, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *ubuntu@ubuntu:~/work/coreboot$ make /bin/sh: 1: Syntax error: >> redirection unexpected/bin/sh: 1: -print-libgcc-file-name: not >> found/bin/sh: 1: -print-libgcc-file-name: not found/bin/sh: 1: Syntax >> error: redirection unexpected/bin/sh: 1: -print-libgcc-file-name: not found >> /bin/sh: 1: -print-libgcc-file-name: not found/bin/sh: 1: Syntax error: >> redirection unexpected/bin/sh: 1: -print-libgcc-file-name: not >> found/bin/sh: 1: -print-libgcc-file-name: not foundwarning: >> (BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS && NORTHBRIDGE_INTEL_NEHALEM && >> SOUTHBRIDGE_VIA_K8M890_VGA_EN && DRIVERS_EMULATION_QEMU_BOCHS) selects VGA >> which has unmet direct dependencies (VENDOR_INTEL && >> BOARD_INTEL_COUGAR_CANYON2) ## configuration written to .config#warning: >> (BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS && NORTHBRIDGE_INTEL_NEHALEM && >> SOUTHBRIDGE_VIA_K8M890_VGA_EN && DRIVERS_EMULATION_QEMU_BOCHS) selects VGA >> which has unmet direct dependencies (VENDOR_INTEL && >> BOARD_INTEL_COUGAR_CANYON2) warning: (BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS && >> NORTHBRIDGE_INTEL_NEHALEM && SOUTHBRIDGE_VIA_K8M890_VGA_EN && >> DRIVERS_EMULATION_QEMU_BOCHS) selects VGA which has unmet direct >> dependencies (VENDOR_INTEL && BOARD_INTEL_COUGAR_CANYON2) HOSTCC >> nvramtool/cli/nvramtool.o HOSTCC nvramtool/cli/opts.o HOSTCC >> nvramtool/cmos_lowlevel.o HOSTCC nvramtool/cmos_ops.o HOSTCC >> nvramtool/common.o HOSTCC nvramtool/compute_ip_checksum.o >> HOSTCC nvramtool/hexdump.o HOSTCC nvramtool/input_file.o >> HOSTCC nvramtool/layout.o HOSTCC >> nvramtool/accessors/layout-common.o HOSTCC >> nvramtool/accessors/layout-text.o HOSTCC >> nvramtool/accessors/layout-bin.o HOSTCC nvramtool/lbtable.o >> HOSTCC nvramtool/reg_expr.o HOSTCC nvramtool/cbfs.o >> HOSTCC nvramtool/accessors/cmos-mem.o HOSTCC nvramtool/nvramtool >> (link) OPTION option_table.h GEN build.h CC >> romstage.incmake: MMD: Command not found POST romstage.incsed: >> can't read build/mainboard/emulation/qemu-i440fx/romstage.pre.inc: No such >> file or directory make: *** >> [build/mainboard/emulation/qemu-i440fx/romstage.inc] Error 2* >> >> It looks the bash on my system does not compatible with the new committed >> makefile, does anyone get the same failure? How to solve it? >> >> The bash I'm using is, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *ubuntu@ubuntu:~/work/coreboot$ /bin/bash --versionGNU bash, version >> 4.3.11(1)-release (i686-pc-linux-gnu)Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software >> Foundation, Inc.License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later >> <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>> This >> is free software; you are free to change and redistribute it.There is NO >> WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.* >> >> *-Fei * >> >> -- >> coreboot mailing list: coreboot(a)coreboot.org >> http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot >> > >

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Older →

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot May 2014