June 2015 - coreboot - mail.coreboot.org

Fitlet-B
by Xan June 16, 2015

June 16, 2015

Hi, I adquired a Compulab Fitlet B machine [http://www.fit-pc.com/web/products/fitlet/] I contacted to Compulab in order to know how to install CoreBIOS to it. They sent me this message: > Hi Xavier, > > We’re in contact with Coreboot community in Finland that are testing and > checking feasibility of the fitlet with their code. > The moment they provide us with answers we will definitely publish them. > > Thanks, > Maxim. Can you confirm that? In which point is this porting? Thanks, Xavi

2 1

coreboot use SeaBIOS as paylod fail
by Yu-Cheng Liu June 16, 2015

June 16, 2015

Hello, When I tried to use QEMU to run COREBOOT(using SeaBIOS as payload), I got some problems and can’t start the computer successfully. Below are the steps I used to build disk.image and corboot.rom. Also the command to start QEMU. Please help me figure out what’s wrong with my steps. Thank you in advance. (PS.: My platform is 64-bit Ubuntu. Version is 14.04)

1 0

Sandybridge: native ram init
by Patrick Rudolph June 15, 2015

June 15, 2015

Hello, I'm trying to get the GA-B75M-D3H to work, but I'm stuck at native ram init. It stops at "c320c discovery failed". I figured out that the lower 4 lanes 0-3 are always erroneous in this test. The upper 4 lanes are working as expected and return errors depending on the skew chosen. All previous tests work fine, so I guess it's not a hardware defect. The PC boots using the stock UEFI. Do you know a "good" RAM module/vendor that is known to work with this board ? I tested * Team Xtreme 2x 4GByte DDR3-2133 * Crucial 1x 2GByte DDR3-1600 but they show the same error message. Do you have any further tips to debug this issue ? Regards, Patrick

1 0

New post published at blog.coreboot.org on June 15, 2015 at 5:55 pm
by WordPress June 15, 2015

June 15, 2015

1 0

make crossgcc error
by Richard Simpson June 15, 2015

June 15, 2015

Hello, I have recently purchased a Lenovo T60 with the hope of installing coreboot and I have to say that the process is making me mighty nervous. I have extracted the default bios and the VGA bios (it has an ATI video controller). I am running CentOS 7. I have run 'make menuconfig' and that seems to have worked, but when I try 'make crossgcc' I get the following error: Warning: no suitable compiler for arm. Warning: no suitable compiler for arm64. Warning: no suitable compiler for mipsel. Warning: no suitable compiler for riscv. ERROR: Missing tool: Please install patch (eg using your OS packaging system) make[1]: *** [build-i386-without-gdb] Error 1 make: *** [crossgcc-i386] Error 2 I have no idea what to do about this. Thanks,

2 1

Re: [coreboot] [Reproducible-builds] coreboot reproducible builds almost there
by Holger Levsen June 13, 2015

June 13, 2015

Hi, On Donnerstag, 11. Juni 2015, Patrick Georgi wrote: > > Things is, _AIUI_, there is no common payload which can be enabled for > > all boards. Is that correct? > The one that should run everywhere is Google's depthcharge, and that > isn't hooked up to the build system like SeaBIOS is (and even > depthcharge isn't available for emulation/qemu-riscv). So you're > correct, there is no single payload for every board. ok. > Since we select default payloads in our Kconfig rules (seabios for > x86), I guess we should start doing the same for other architectures. > I don't think that belongs in your test script - things might change > in the future, and that shouldn't require additional effort on your > part. agreed :) > We'll work on that, and will tell you once there's a plan and/or > implementation. cool, thanks. That said, as the current tests have reached 100%, I'm thinking about removing the "--payloads none" switch again now already, so that then some images have payloads and some not. > > And then I'm wondering, "what next"? AIUI you don't ever offer images for > > download and instead expect users to build coreboot themselves. So the > > whole topic of verifying and reproducing the vendors (=your!) binaries > > is a bit mood here, at least atm. Any comments on that? > > There are distributions, sort of. > Google ships coreboot as part of Chrome OS (which requires a huge > build system even to build just coreboot). > Then there's libreboot (www.libreboot.org) which ships their > coreboot-variant (without blobs and with as few patches against > coreboot as possible) with GRUB2 as payload for a small selection of > boards that they can support. > There are also some other vendors, but they're less visible. Hm. I guess I will leave it here for the moment, hoping that someone will pick up the task of verifying actually released and downloadable images... > If you want to support coreboot distributions (that ship binaries), > libreboot is currently your best bet. added as question to my TODO :) > > Last, and probably least: currently the headline of the page says "fast, > > flexible and reproducible Open Source firmware_?_" which I felt was > > appropriate when only a few images with payload were reproducible. > Oh, I loved it, still do! At some point we should replace the question > mark with an exclamation mark, though :-) :-) I've change the code to exchange the question mark against an exclaimation mark if 100% are reached... :) > > Oh, and as the page says, it's currently only updated once a month and on > > demand, so please do ping me if you merged some reproducible changes into > > master! > Thanks, will do. Let's start immediately :-) > Since you mentioned 'once we reach 100% (without payloads)' earlier: > the issue of the remaining 7 non-reproducible board should be fixed > since today, in response to your report. I'd appreciate if you could > do another run to verify this. https://jenkins.debian.net/view/reproducible/job/reproducible_coreboot/44/c… has just finished and https://reproducible.debian.net/coreboot/coreboot.html now says "248 (100.0%) out of 248 built coreboot images were reproducible in our test setup" - kudos!! cheers, Holger

1 0

Re: [coreboot] coreboot reproducible builds almost there
by Paul Menzel June 13, 2015

June 13, 2015

Dear coreboot folks, Am Donnerstag, den 26.02.2015, 17:23 +0200 schrieb Emilian Bold: > I was trying to duplicate a coreboot build back in November and I noticed I > couldn't get my ROM file to be identical to the one I found online. > > It seems that coreboot doesn't have reproducible builds yet. > > Debian has been looking into this for a while > https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds and I think coreboot should > adopt this concept. […] Holger Levsen joined #coreboot(a)irc.freenode.net yesterday to report that he integrated coreboot into the reproducible builds infrastructure [1]. After configuring the used build script [2] to build without a payload, nice ionice -c 3 \ bash util/abuild/abuild --payloads none || true # don't fail the full job just because some targets fail it looks like most boards are passing the test now [1]. Big thanks to Alexander (lynxis) for submitting the necessary patches! The only exceptions are the six boards below. * a-trend_atc-6220 (256K) is unreproducible. * a-trend_atc-6240 (256K) is unreproducible. * google_nyan (4096K) is unreproducible. * google_nyan_big (4096K) is unreproducible. * google_rush (4096K) is unreproducible. * google_rush_ryu (8192K) is unreproducible. Also, as a side node, SeaBIOS also supports to be built reproducible since commit 624e8127 (build: Support "make VERSION=xyz" to override the default build version) [3], though not by default. So the coreboot build system, building the SeaBIOS payload, would need to be adapted, if a reproducible build with the SeaBIOS payload is required. Thanks, Paul [1] https://reproducible.debian.net/coreboot/coreboot.html [2] http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/qa/jenkins.debian.net.git/tree/bin/reproduci… [3] http://seabios.org/pipermail/seabios/2015-June/009253.html

4 4

New post published at blog.coreboot.org on June 12, 2015 at 8:45 am
by WordPress June 12, 2015

June 12, 2015

1 0

Re: [coreboot] coreboot reproducible builds almost there
by Paul Menzel June 12, 2015

June 12, 2015

Dear coreboot and reproducible build folks, Am Donnerstag, den 11.06.2015, 21:58 +0200 schrieb Patrick Georgi: > 2015-06-11 10:25 GMT+02:00 Holger Levsen <holger(a)layer-acht.org>: […] > > Last, and probably least: currently the headline of the page says > > "fast, flexible and reproducible Open Source firmware_?_" which I > > felt was appropriate when only a few images with payload were > > reproducible. > > Oh, I loved it, still do! At some point we should replace the > question mark with an exclamation mark, though :-) > > > Oh, and as the page says, it's currently only updated once a month > > and on demand, so please do ping me if you merged some reproducible > > changes into master! > > Thanks, will do. Let's start immediately :-) > Since you mentioned 'once we reach 100% (without payloads)' earlier: > the issue of the remaining 7 non-reproducible board should be fixed > since today, in response to your report. I'd appreciate if you could > do another run to verify this. Patrick, thanks a lot for submitting patches to fix the remaining issues. With 4.0-9975-g1f38d79 only one board is listed [1] as not reproducible buildable and that is Google Urara [2]. -3 00000020: 0000 009a 0799 afe7 009b 1d3c 0020 bd27 ...........<. .' +3 00000020: 0000 009a 0719 ae47 009b 1d3c·0020·bd27 .......G...<. .' Thanks, Paul [1] https://reproducible.debian.net/coreboot/coreboot.html [2] https://reproducible.debian.net/coreboot/dbd/google_urara.html

1 0

Re: [coreboot] Flashrom won't work with DediProg SF100 fw 6.5.03
by Stefan Reinauer June 11, 2015

June 11, 2015

* Steve Goodrich <steve.goodrich(a)se-eng.com> [150602 20:38]: > I got the Chromium version of flashrom to work, but it takes 20 minutes to > flash/verify the 8 MB device. So, while "working" is far better than "not > working", it is a bit sluggish. :-) I seem to remember there are two ways flashrom can program through a dediprog, the slow one that always works, and the fast one that we didn't know which chips it's working with, so it defaults to the slow path. Stefan

1 0