Dear coreboot community,
I have been trying to merge few mainboard for some time, however I find
it difficult to get reviews (and lead it towards merging), despite
fulfilling all requests like Documentation entry.
I have rebased it, added Documentation entry, however nobody touched it
since I lastly updated it in November.
Following the same convention I have updated a Protectli FW6 Kaby Lake
board patch today:
Probably this week I will also update another mainboard patch with
Are there any exit criteria which initial mainboard commit should fulfil
to be considered good quality and complete? I have also added changes to
MAINTAINERS file (for the FW6) to indicate that these patches will not
become a piece of unused and unmaintained code.
The first two patches are solid and all issues documented. All of them
will receive an entry in MAINTAINERS file. I would very appreciate a
little bit of your attention on them and possibly reviews.
I especially need the Kaby Lake board, because 3mdeb will soon begin
upstreaming changes to support Boot Guard and Protectli FW6 is our
reference platform. I don't want the mainboard patches to be a burden or
blocking any related efforts. So I kindly ask for a tiny bit of your
time to have a look at these patches. Let's improve coreboot together
and make it a competitive (and even better) replacement of proprietary
With kind regards,
https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com
since we're invited to participate in this year's GSoC and since students
can send their project proposals starting next week, I guess now is the
time to register potential mentors with the system, so we can triage and
assign proposals efficiently.
If helping a student get up to speed with coreboot development and open
source development in general sounds like a great way to spend your time
to you, please consider mentoring!
Note to potential student participants: There's a conflict of interest
in being both a student and a mentor and so GSoC doesn't allow that. If
you consider joining GSoC as a student (for any participating open source
project) this year, don't ask to become a mentor.
Our expectations of a mentor are:
- Being around for most of mid of March (when the applications rush in) to
mid of August (when everything wraps up)
- Work with the student to build a realistic project plan
- Being the point of contact for a specific student working on a
specific project from mid of May to mid of August
- Following up on their student's progress and helping them along.
This usually means:
- One or more sync meetings with the student every week (schedule is
up to you and your student to sort out)
- Being available for helping them when they get stuck
- Encourage them to participate in the community. Students with no
prior OSS experience are often a bit shy, and a big part of GSoC
is to help them get into it. This depends on the student, but can
involve being their wingman on IRC, encouraging them to push code
for review early and go through the feedback they get together
(it often looks scary for new-comers)
- 3 evaluations of the student's progress (in mid-June, -July, -August)
If that time frame covers a week or two of down time (vacation etc), we
can likely handle that (but it helps to know about scheduled off-time
in advance!) If it's more, maybe there should be more than one mentor
to your student. If you're dropping out due to some unforeseen event,
that's on David Hendricks and I (in our function as org admins) to sort
out, finding a replacement or jumping in ourselves.
If you're interested, feel free to send me a private email and we'll
take it from there.
Google Germany GmbH, ABC-Str. 19, 20354 Hamburg
Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891, Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg
Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah DeLaine Prado
[resend with right account]
On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 5:50 PM Julius Werner <jwerner(a)google.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to refactor some CBFS code (which necessarily leaks into
> the prog_loaders) and
> mirror_payload()/CONFIG_MIRROR_PAYLOAD_TO_RAM_BEFORE_LOADING is a bit
> of a complication. I'm trying to understand if this option is actually
> used by anyone. It seems to be "default n" in Kconfig and I don't see
> any mainboard/SoC select it specifically. It is not user-visible in
> menuconfig and the Chrome OS specific defconfig files don't select it
> either. In the original patch
> (https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/5305) there seems to have
> been some discussion about which boards can even benefit from this,
> and I don't see any indication that it was ever really enabled
> So is this actually used anywhere, by anyone? Can I just rip it out?
I've built coreboot with seabios for the Supermicro X11SSM-F motherboard
and i'd like to use the internal usb3.0 port with a usb stick as a boot
If power on the board and do a cold boot the usb works just fine, but if
i reboot the system or use the reset button the usb is not recognized in
If i use a usb2 port instead there are no issues at all.
I can't figure out the reason for this... has anyone an idea on how to
fix this issue or experienced this before?
i attached the complete console debug output from a cold and warm boot
as well as the config file, any help is appreciated.
Interesting article today from Positive Technologies.
I can't tell if this creates an opportunity for users to fully control ME on affected computers (via coreboot/me_cleaner), or if this is a nail in the coffin.
In particular the following statement was interesting: "In ROM, this vulnerability also allows for arbitrary code execution at the zero level of privilege of Intel CSME. No firmware updates can fix the vulnerability."
As I understand it, the only thing missing with regard to nvidia dGPUs on
Coreboot are the ACPI calls to turn them on and off at run-time, which is
what Optimus is. Things like DRI_PRIME and similar work just fine as long
as the dGPU is running, even under nouveau.
What is the current status of the work to get nvidia Optimus working? From
what I gather there have been a couple of attempts and a recent restart,
but I don't know what the current status of this work is.
I have heard that some laptops currently have the option to switch the dGPU
on or off at boot-time. For which ones does this work?
If the work on Optimus is completed, what laptops are most likely to
support it? My expectation is that turning the GPU on or off may be
different for different laptops, even though the ACPI calls are the same,
and so may not work everywhere.