coreboot April 2015

coreboot@coreboot.org

54 participants
92 discussions

Google Panther: coreboot has to wait for Intel’s ME (Management Engine)
by Paul Menzel 27 Apr '15

27 Apr '15

Dear coreboot folks, looking at the time stamps of the Intel Haswell device Google Panther, which Matt DeVillier thankfully uploaded to the board status repository [1], it looks odd that it took around a quarter of a second, from after the SeaBIOS payload was decompressed to starting the payload. This is almost half of the whole boot time. […] 90:load payload 233,302 (216) 15:starting LZMA decompress (ignore for x86) 233,415 (113) 16:finished LZMA decompress (ignore for x86) 250,327 (16,912) 99:selfboot jump 493,712 (243,384) Thanks to Aaron Durbin’s analysis of the code path, the finalize in line 138 of `src/southbridge/intel/lynxpoint/smi.c` calls `intel_me_mbp_clear()` in line 589 of `src/southbridge/intel/lynxpoint/me_9.x.c`. $ more src/southbridge/intel/lynxpoint/me_9.x.c # line 589 […] #if CONFIG_ME_MBP_CLEAR_LATE /* Wait for ME MBP Cleared indicator */ intel_me_mbp_clear(PCH_ME_DEV); #endif […] The issue is even described in the Kconfig option description of `ME_MBP_CLEAR_LATE` and the commit message of commit 3d299c4b (lynxpoint me: add support for mbp clear wait in finalize step) [2] adding this option. $ more src/southbridge/intel/lynxpoint/Kconfig […] config ME_MBP_CLEAR_LATE bool "Defer wait for ME MBP Cleared" default y help If you set this option to y, the Management Engine driver will defer waiting for the MBP Cleared indicator until the finalize step. This can speed up boot time if the ME takes a long time to indicate this status. […] I guess there is no way to get fixed ME BLOBs from Intel. I heard the ME BLOB has been fixed for newer Intel devices. Thanks, Paul [1] http://review.coreboot.org/gitweb?p=board-status.git;a=commitdiff;h=3926f95… [2] http://review.coreboot.org/4375

3 2

Re: [coreboot] Supported VIA notebook?
by Peter Stuge 27 Apr '15

27 Apr '15

L.R. D.S. wrote: > There any coreboot VIA notebook? No. > The VIA website [3] list some models, many with supported specs > (CPU C7-M ULV and Chipset VIA VX800). So someone with an interest (you) could get one and submit a patch to Gerrit. //Peter

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Regarding Intel (and Librem)
by Vladimir 26 Apr '15

26 Apr '15

Today I discovered that CPU is indeed socket-ed on G505s, so it is possible to get G505s with less powerful CPU (e.g. A8) , and - if it turns out to be not compatible, or not fast enough for your needs, then you could get A10-5750M and install by yourself. Saw it for ~$50-$80 at Aliexpress (higher price for not used yet) There are three slightly different motherboards which could be found in Lenovo G505s, all made by Compal Electronics : *1) *LA-A092P for only 8650G, which is built-in into APU (no dual graphics) *2)* LA-A091P rev 1.0 for 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) *3)* LA-A091P rev 1.A for 8650G + AMD R5 M230 ( dual graphics, slightly more powerful than "2)" ) And, some other Lenovo laptops have the same Compal motherboards, e.g. G405s has LA-A091P. If I am correct: there are more Lenovo AMD laptops supported by Coreboot, they are just not tested yet... Also, on my motherboard there was no MXIC chip, but cFeon QH32-104HIP bios chip instead. As you see, lots of things could be added to Coreboot G505s wiki. I've asked a coreboot wiki account so that I could improve g505s page: add new information, and clarify older as well On 17 April 2015 at 11:45, Vladimir <quickcracktime(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Problem with Librem is not just that it isn't fully free yet and doesn't > seem to become so in future, but also that it is an Intel-based product. > > Intel is totally NOT friendly to coreboot project (and open source > community in general) - that could be seen by their malevolent actions, > such as introduction of Boot Guard "feature". Intel tries to justify them > by "it's for your safety" preaching; but, "anytime someone puts a lock on > something you own, against your wishes, and doesn't give you the key, > they're not doing it for your benefit" (Doctorow's Law) > > By purchasing a product of a company, you are fully supporting their > policy. And that is why it is not good to support Intel by getting > Intel-based products and developing for Intel, despite ~75% of x86/x86_64 > CPU market is owned by them. > > You are right, there are some difficulties about AMD products, such as the > need to reverse engineer SMU and Atombios firmwares for their APUs. But at > least they're not putting deliberate hardware obstacles in their new > products, and if they don't become "evil" like Intel (hope so) AMD could be > a future of coreboot x86/x86_64 branch. > > P.S. In addition to Lenovo G505s, I was very happy to find out that - > thanks to latest contributors - coreboot is now supporting the ASROCK > IMB-A180 and Biostar AM1ML which are based on AMD AM1 platform > (architecture family 16h, Puma/Jaguar SoCs are compatible) Maybe some of > these products have a potential to be RYF'ed, will see... > > Best regards, > Vladimir Shipovalov > > On 11 April 2015 at 19:33, Peter Stuge <peter(a)stuge.se> wrote: > >> Alexandru Gagniuc wrote: >> > figured out how to fuse the PCH to disable ME >> >> Please read ISBN 9781430265719. >> >> The ME firmware controls the host CPU reset. >> >> //Peter >> >> On 10 April 2015 at 08:45, Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Monday, April 06, 2015 01:45:32 PM Vladimir wrote: >>> > Dear coreboot developers, >>> > >>> > Francis Rowe (main Libreboot developer) has hinted an idea about adding >>> > Lenovo G505S to Coreboot LTS Candidates list of laptops, which is >>> hosted at >>> > MrNuke's User talk coreboot wiki page. I believe it is an excellent >>> idea, >>> > because: >>> > >>> You are free to add it, but keep in mind that anything with an AMD APU >>> will >>> fail the RYF-certifiable criteria due to SMU and atombios. >>> >>> If we're going to lower the bar, we should also consider Librem 15. At >>> least >>> that one has (should have) a much more durable construction and much >>> better >>> screen. If those guys aren't as full of it as they sound, and have >>> figured out >>> how to fuse the PCH to disable ME, then RYF'ing a Librem should be less >>> work >>> than anything APU. >>> >>> > Best regards, >>> Alex >>> >>> On 8 April 2015 at 12:49, Vladimir <quickcracktime(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> What if A8 model is supported as well, just not tested yet? These APUs >>>> are very similar to each other, after all ;) >>>> Maybe a knowledgeable coreboot developers, especially those who have >>>> ported coreboot to G505S, could tell what parts of code are A10-specific - >>>> and, if there is indeed such a code, how to change the parameters of that >>>> code to make them suitable for A8 ? >>>> >>>> In case they don't reply: if you have SPI clip as well as BIOS >>>> programmer that supports many chips including MX25L1606E , could try a >>>> following scenario: >>>> 1) get A8 G505S locally & try to install coreboot >>>> 2) if it works, announce it to a mailing list that there's a support >>>> and keep a laptop to yourself ; but if it doesn't work - even after playing >>>> with parameters - and a laptop is bricked, you could restore a >>>> manufacturer's BIOS using SPI clip & BIOS programmer, and then return a >>>> laptop to seller... >>>> >>>> About A10 model - it does not seem to be US-only: there are a lot of >>>> offers in Russia, as well as at "developing countries" such as >>>> Thailand/India (maybe that stock was inherited from EU countries) But, >>>> because of huge quantity of different laptop models/modifications, and >>>> dependence of their local availability on local retailers' preference, >>>> there are countries which got either a small stock of G505S or none at all! >>>> :P And that returns us to "reasonable availability" debate... In my >>>> perception: >>>> >>>> "Reasonable availability" for a laptop model, is when a person is able >>>> to get a new laptop (not used/refurbished) - for a price that does not >>>> exceed the manufacturer's list price by more than X % of it. (e.g. 25%). >>>> That additional condition regarding the list price is necessary, because if >>>> there would be some greedy retailers left - who didn't sold out their large >>>> stock just because of outrageous unreasonable prices - I wouldn't call this >>>> as "reasonably available" ;) >>>> >>>> As you see, "reasonable availability" is a quite subjective term, >>>> because if your country doesn't have a stock of this laptop: >>>> *) your price would be not just price of unit but also a shipping price >>>> from other country, + possible import taxes >>>> *) there are various risks: if, because of your location, you cannot >>>> buy a laptop in store after checking its quality, >>>> a laptop could have manufacturing defects that are not enough to >>>> request a replacement/partial refund, e.g. laws based on ISO 13406-2 >>>> standard could allow a seller to refuse a replacement of laptop if there >>>> are a few annoying dead pixels. >>>> These risks have a different "weight" in the eyes of different people, >>>> e.g. many people wouldn't consider it as "reasonably available" even if >>>> it's available from neighbor country with a low shipping price, because >>>> they do not want to risk. And that makes this term even more subjective and >>>> hard to measure by automatic metrics... >>>> >>>> P.S. Indeed, some laptops that are listed in coreboot "LTS Candidates" >>>> list ( http://www.coreboot.org/User_talk:MrNuke/LTS_Candidates ) have >>>> A10-5750M as well and seem to be more "reasonably available" than G505S, at >>>> least for your country. But, despite having a somewhat similar hardware, >>>> nobody ported a coreboot to them yet :P >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Vladimir Shipovalov >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7 April 2015 at 16:17, Emilian Bold <emilian.bold(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> My point is not to limit your LTS list to US laptops. US has >>>>> *extraordinary* availability for a lot of gear. >>>>> >>>>> There's also the matter of procurement and warranty. A company won't >>>>> bother importing some laptop from outside the EU just because a developer >>>>> wants it -- they will look locally and as a last resort within the EU. >>>>> >>>>> Except some brands (Apple comes to mind) warranty becomes a hassle if >>>>> the laptop breaks. Transport costs, long wait time and language issues >>>>> complicate matters. >>>>> >>>>> Amazon Germany seems to have 2 laptops in stock with A10. Amazon >>>>> Spain/France/Italy/Netherlands has none. Only Amazon UK seems to have it >>>>> without giving a stock warning (but it's sold by a 3d party). >>>>> >>>>> Anyhow, I don't want to sidetrack this, but the first criteria for the >>>>> LTS laptop is "reasonable availability"... >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps you should have some metric for availability (this could even >>>>> be automated somewhat). Pick a list of top electronics sites/stores from a >>>>> list of countries and define a formula based on model availability. >>>>> >>>>> Alternatively, it would be great to support the A8 too! >>>>> >>>>> To me the the G505S would clearly be a better machine to recommend >>>>> compared to an ancient Thinkpad X2xx! >>>>> >>>>> --emi >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Vladimir <quickcracktime(a)gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> If I am not mistaken, your country is Romania... Unfortunately - if I >>>>>> didn't skip something - it looks like Romania went out of A10 stock just a >>>>>> couple of weeks ago! However, I found many offers from Hungary, which is >>>>>> very close! Some offers are listed on "price list"-type websites (e.g. >>>>>> http://www.arukereso.hu/CategorySearch.php?st=g505s+a10 ) while >>>>>> others are not listed anywhere (e.g. >>>>>> http://www.notebookspecialista.hu/lenovo_ideapad_g505s_59_422983_notebook-1… >>>>>> ) >>>>>> Nice thing is that these offers usually have A10 + R5 230M, slightly >>>>>> faster dual graphics. But the majority of G505S models selling in Europe >>>>>> have Win8 pre-installed, so I'm afraid it would be hard to avoid paying >>>>>> extra for this bloatware, in your case :P >>>>>> >>>>>> As for other European countries, it is difficult for me to look >>>>>> through the entire EU because there are many countries with many languages. >>>>>> I only know English as foreign language, and thats why the majority of >>>>>> foreign offers I'm able to find, are in UK/US... >>>>>> >>>>>> On 6 April 2015 at 23:12, Emilian Bold <emilian.bold(a)gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, the G505S with A10-5750M is explicitly listed as no longer >>>>>>> being sold. So it's the A8 or nothing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Could you provide links within the EU with (online) shops still >>>>>>> selling the A10 variant and having some actual stock? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --emi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Vladimir <quickcracktime(a)gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes, in addition to A10-5750M based G505S there are also A8 and A6 >>>>>>>> ones. But there are some possible problems regarding them: >>>>>>>> 1) their price is just slightly lower than with A10 - as result, >>>>>>>> price/performance ratio seems to be worse for these models >>>>>>>> 2) I'm not sure if it is possible could upgrade their APU from >>>>>>>> A6/A8 to A10-5750M after purchase >>>>>>>> 3) most importantly: some parameters inside a coreboot source code >>>>>>>> for G505S could be A10-specific ; >>>>>>>> I am not sure if a current "A10-inclined build" would run on A8/A6 >>>>>>>> out of the box, without additional tweaking >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A question from my last letter - about compatibility of G505S >>>>>>>> coreboot build with various graphics solutions found in different >>>>>>>> modifications, is not addressed yet... to remind, there are three groups of >>>>>>>> modifications: >>>>>>>> *) only 8650G (no dual graphics) >>>>>>>> *) 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) >>>>>>>> *) 8650G + AMD R5 M230 (dual graphics, slightly faster) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> P.S. Below is an =incomplete= list of SKUs for A10 G505S models >>>>>>>> that I was able to find. If there is a shortage in your country, maybe this >>>>>>>> list could assist you in search (those mods with windows 8 are about $50 >>>>>>>> more expensive and support evil M$, please dont get them ;-) ) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1) only 8650G (no dual graphics) + 4GB + FreeDOS = 59-410323 >>>>>>>> 2) only 8650G (no dual graphics) + 8GB + FreeDOS = 59-405169 >>>>>>>> 3) only 8650G (no dual graphics) + 4GB + Windows 8 = 59-380131 >>>>>>>> 4) only 8650G (no dual graphics) + 6GB + Windows 8 = 59-373010 / >>>>>>>> 59-406417 >>>>>>>> 5) only 8650G (no dual graphics) + 8GB + Windows 8 = 59-403088 >>>>>>>> 6) 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) + 4GB + FreeDOS = 59-405168 >>>>>>>> 7) 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) + 6GB + FreeDOS = 59-409773 >>>>>>>> 8) 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) + 8GB + FreeDOS = 59-380146 >>>>>>>> / 59-387536 >>>>>>>> 9) 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) + 4GB + Windows 8 = >>>>>>>> 59-407135 / 59410966 >>>>>>>> 10) 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) + 6GB + Windows 8 = >>>>>>>> 59-382102 >>>>>>>> 11) 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) + 8GB + Windows 8 = >>>>>>>> 59-401209 >>>>>>>> 12) 8650G + AMD R5 M230 (dual graphics, slightly faster) + 4GB + >>>>>>>> FreeDOS = 59-410881 >>>>>>>> 13) 8650G + AMD R5 M230 (dual graphics, slightly faster) + 8GB + >>>>>>>> FreeDOS = 59-410885 >>>>>>>> 14) 8650G + AMD R5 M230 (dual graphics, slightly faster) + 4GB + >>>>>>>> Windows 8 = 59-408604 >>>>>>>> 15) 8650G + AMD R5 M230 (dual graphics, slightly faster) + 8GB + >>>>>>>> Windows 8 = 59-410883 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 6 April 2015 at 14:20, Emilian Bold <emilian.bold(a)gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I can confirm I'm still able to buy a G505S in my country but it >>>>>>>>> seems to have the quad core A8-4500M (not the A10) with a dedicated >>>>>>>>> Radeon HD 8570M. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It's a decent machine and it would be great to have it on the >>>>>>>>> official LTS list. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Speaking of the list, I cannot find any store selling the Toshiba >>>>>>>>> Satellite C50D-A mentioned in the wiki. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --emi >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Vladimir <quickcracktime(a)gmail.com >>>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dear coreboot developers, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Francis Rowe (main Libreboot developer) has hinted an idea about >>>>>>>>>> adding Lenovo G505S to Coreboot LTS Candidates list of laptops, which is >>>>>>>>>> hosted at MrNuke's User talk coreboot wiki page. I believe it is an >>>>>>>>>> excellent idea, because: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> *1)* Lenovo G505S contains AMD APU, so there is no need to deal >>>>>>>>>> with Intel ME/AMT so-called "features" >>>>>>>>>> *2)* this APU has Richland architecture: as result (unlike the >>>>>>>>>> more recent AMD offerings) it doesn't have "AMD Secure" feature -- based on >>>>>>>>>> ARM Trustzone technology which already has some exploits against it; there >>>>>>>>>> are security concerns about ARM Trustzone that are similar to concerns >>>>>>>>>> about Intel vPro "feature" (remote management etc.) >>>>>>>>>> *3)* this APU is A10-5750M, the most powerful mobile APU among >>>>>>>>>> Richland designs - as result, this laptop is still very competitive >>>>>>>>>> regarding its performance, and also price/performance >>>>>>>>>> *4)* Unlike the older HP M6-1035DX amd laptop, Lenovo G505S >>>>>>>>>> seems to be a very popular model: even now, more than 1.5 years after its' >>>>>>>>>> introduction, there are >200 Internet shops in my large city still selling >>>>>>>>>> it new in box - not used/refurbished >>>>>>>>>> *5)* Lenovo G505s works without microcode updates, and already >>>>>>>>>> has a working Coreboot build (although Video BIOS and SMU firmware have >>>>>>>>>> blobs that are still not reverse-engineered; and some minor issues - e.g. >>>>>>>>>> ACPI not perfect yet ) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> These great points are making me wonder, why this interesting >>>>>>>>>> laptop still haven't been added to that LTS Candidates list? Does it fail >>>>>>>>>> to meet some requirement for LTS candidates in a not-obvious way >>>>>>>>>> (RYF-certifiable,Sturdy,Long shelf-life,Cool factor) or there is some >>>>>>>>>> not-listed AMD laptop that could be a better candidate? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> By the way, I have discovered that there are many modifications >>>>>>>>>> of Lenovo G505S, which could be divided into three primary groups by their >>>>>>>>>> major difference - GPU *(minor differences, such as different >>>>>>>>>> size of RAM or hard drive, are not interesting)* >>>>>>>>>> GPU modification groups: >>>>>>>>>> *1)* only 8650G, which is built-in into APU (no dual graphics) >>>>>>>>>> *2)* 8650G + AMD HD 8570M (dual graphics) >>>>>>>>>> *3)* 8650G + AMD R5 M230 ( dual graphics, slightly more powerful >>>>>>>>>> than "2)" ) >>>>>>>>>> Are these modifications all supported by Coreboot? And would be >>>>>>>>>> there any additional difficulties regarding modifications with dual >>>>>>>>>> graphics? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Your answers and opinions will be very welcome >>>>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>>>> Vladimir Shipovalov >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> coreboot mailing list: coreboot(a)coreboot.org >>>>>>>>>> http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Zako coreboot serial output does not insert 'return caret'
by Anatol Pomozov 25 Apr '15

25 Apr '15

Hi On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Aaron Durbin <adurbin(a)chromium.org> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:35 AM, Anatol Pomozov > <anatol.pomozov(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi >> >> I am playing with coreboot and try to build it with seabios payload for my >> Zako device. Here is .config I use to compile coreboot at current HEAD >> (4038a7f631dc) https://gist.github.com/a950a69e737ac06a24f3 I use board >> "Panther" that I believe is the same as one in my Zako. >> >> I use google's servo to deploy FW to the board and I see a weird debug log >> in my console. The log from coreboot looks like newline is inserted, but >> return caret is not. SeaBIOS debug looks normal. Here and the log example >> https://gist.github.com/anatol/8e30c8d5045ddf7e6b03 >> >> The host is Linux Arch. I tried several different console apps (cu, com) but >> result is the same. >> >> Dear community, do you have ideas what can make the coreboot log unreadable? > > Feel free to cherry pick this: http://review.coreboot.org/9932 Thanks Aaron, it fixed the issue for me. > Also, I've been working on optimizing SeaBIOS/coreboot for all the Haswell ChromeBoxes for the past year, and noticed that your config isn't ideal. Feel free to check out my config, build scripts, etc at https://github.com/MattDevo/coreboot and lmk if you have any questions (or feedback/improvements etc) Thanks Matt. Checking your configs and patches is on my TODO list.

1 0

[Announcement] Please rebuild utility cbmem after new addition of time stamps
by Paul Menzel 25 Apr '15

25 Apr '15

Dear coreboot folks, commit a7d92441 (timestamps: You can never have enough of them!) [1] added new time stamps. So please rebuild the utility `cbmem` so that the output does not contain any *unknown* strings [2]. Or on my ASRock E350M1 with 4.0-9470-g72645bb [3] With old cbmem: 12 entries total: 10:start of ramstage 5 30:device enumeration 440 (435) 40:device configuration 94,705 (94,264) 50:device enable 98,542 (3,837) 60:device initialization 108,505 (9,963) 70:device setup done 236,433 (127,927) 75:cbmem post 236,813 (379) 80:write tables 236,817 (4) 90:load payload 238,345 (1,528) 15:starting LZMA decompress (ignore for x86) 238,557 (211) 16:finished LZMA decompress (ignore for x86) 255,012 (16,454) 99:selfboot jump 255,033 (20) After rebuilding cbmem: 12 entries total: 10:start of ramstage 5 30:device enumeration 440 (435) 40:device configuration 94,705 (94,264) 50:device enable 98,542 (3,837) 60:device initialization 108,505 (9,963) 70:device setup done 236,433 (127,927) 75:cbmem post 236,813 (379) 80:write tables 236,817 (4) 90:load payload 238,345 (1,528) 15:<unknown> 238,557 (211) 16:<unknown> 255,012 (16,454) 99:selfboot jump 255,033 (20) Thanks, Paul [1] http://review.coreboot.org/9608 [2] http://review.coreboot.org/gitweb?p=board-status.git;a=blob;f=asus/kfsn4-dr…

3 2

Supported VIA notebook?
by L.R. D.S. 25 Apr '15

25 Apr '15

Hi, There any coreboot VIA notebook? On [1] is cited the One A110, but in supported motherboards page have nothing about it. The VIA website [3] list some models, many with supported specs (CPU C7-M ULV and Chipset VIA VX800). --mutus Please, CC me, I'm not in this mailing list. [1] coreboot.org/laptop [2] coreboot.org/Supported_Motherboards [3] http://www.via.com.tw/en/products/notebook/notebook.jsp

1 0

toolchain for building mips targets
by Vadim Bendebury 25 Apr '15

25 Apr '15

guys, how do you set up toolchain for building mips targets (or rather mips target, as there is just one currently :). I got this flavor from Mentor Graphics site: mips-linux-gnu-gcc (Sourcery CodeBench Lite 2014.05-27) 4.8.3 20140320 (prerelease) Copyright (C) 2013 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. the thing is that it requires a command line option to generate little endian object files (-EL), but xcompile does not provide one and as a result fails to accept this toolchain as valid. BTW, this is how I invoke xcompile for the purposes of this experiment: CROSS_COMPILE=mips-linux-gnu- util/xcompile/xcompile TIA, -vb

1 0

On Intel Boot Guard
by Iru Cai 23 Apr '15

23 Apr '15

Hi, I've just seen a forum thread about removing the white list of ThinkPad X240, so I think Boot Guard is not preventing modification of BIOS. Then I read some article, which says what Boot Guard locks is the boot block, so I think there's still some way to flash coreboot on a new Intel platform.

1 0

gerrit authentication
by Patrick Georgi 23 Apr '15

23 Apr '15

Hi, To provide more options to contributors, it's now possible to login to our code review system at http://review.coreboot.org using GitHub credentials. On the login screen, simply pick 'GitHub OAuth2'. If you already have an account, you can link your GitHub account to it by logging in on gerrit, clicking 'Link Another Identity' on http://review.coreboot.org/#/settings/web-identities, and selecting GitHub OAuth2 (and acknowleding on GitHub that you want to associate your account with coreboot code review). Of course, OpenID still works, as does logging in using Google Accounts through OAuth2. Regards, Patrick -- Google Germany GmbH, ABC-Str. 19, 20354 Hamburg Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg Geschäftsführer: Graham Law, Christine Elizabeth Flores

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Smi handler issue
by Kyösti Mälkki 23 Apr '15

23 Apr '15

On Tue, 2015-04-21 at 23:09 +0530, Naresh G. Solanki wrote: > Dear all, > > While compiling coreboot, southbridge smm handler always compiles as empty > function irrespective of the code present in it. > > As per declaration in smm.h, it is declared as attribute weak. > > Since it is defined in my southbridge smm handler, it should take the > defined function which it is not happening (objdump shows that only the > southbridge smm handler function has only ret instruction, rest all > function have proper assembly code as per the required implementation .) > > I need smm handler for enabling acpi mode during os booting. > > Please help in solving this issue. > > Regards, > N Solanki Which board and chipset is this? Please describe how to reproduce the error on current master from coreboot.org git using the reference xgcc toolchain? Kyösti

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
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 April 2015