coreboot

coreboot@coreboot.org

39717 discussions

[LinuxBIOS] RE: x86_64: calibrate_delay_direct and apic id lift for BSP
by Lu, Yinghai 29 Oct '05

29 Oct '05

I have tried latest code..., except that, it works well. YH -----Original Message----- From: Andi Kleen [mailto:ak@suse.de] Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 11:53 AM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: discuss(a)x86-64.org; linux-kernel(a)vger.kernel.org; linuxbios(a)openbios.org Subject: Re: x86_64: calibrate_delay_direct and apic id lift for BSP On Friday 28 October 2005 20:42, Yinghai Lu wrote: > andi, > > I tried to lift apic id in LinuxBIOS for all cpus after 0x10. > > When using MB with AMD8111, the jiffies was not moving. So it is > locked at calibrate_delay_direct... Have you tried it with 2.6.14? It has some new code to handle high apic ids better > but MB with Nvidia ck804, jiffies is moving. The timer is wired different on nvidia than on 8111. They can go either through the 8259 or through the IOAPIC. There is still some code that falls back to the 8259 if IOAPIC doesn't work, which may make it appear working on Nvidia. As a warning I'm about to remove that code so don't rely on it. > If I don't change BSP apic id ( keep it to 0), It changes.... > > I have no idea how the jiffies changes, there is another thread change it....? They change when interrupt 0 fires. So it's probably misrouted or similar. -Andi

3 2

[LinuxBIOS] Proposed change to amdk8 memory controller code
by San Mehat 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

Greets, I've made some modifications locally here to the amdk8 memory code and wanted to just chuck them out there to see what you guys think: 1 - Renamed DIMM_SOCKETS define to DIMM_SOCKETS_PER_CHANNEL since thats what it actually is. 2 - Added 'channel0_pop' and 'channel1_pop' to 'struct mem_controller' and modified 'raminit.c' to fill this in with the physical DIMM population map. For us knowing the detected DIMM population map *at the mainboard level* is very usefull. Fire away ;) -San

5 8

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies
by Lu, Yinghai 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

No 1. CONFIG_USE_INIT==0 is very useful for debug. 2. CONFIG_USE_INIT==1 is something ppc car using... Auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c is very different 1. cache_as_ram_auto include failover.c 2. later cache_as_ram_auto will have struct sys_info sysinfox, and it will include every info include dimm.....and we don't need to keep read smbus and pci conf space for.... YH -----Original Message----- From: Li-Ta Lo [mailto:ollie@lanl.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 1:22 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: Stefan Reinauer; LinuxBIOS Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 11:11 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > If CONFIG_USE_INIT == 0, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled to > auto.inc. ---> part of crt0.s---> part of linuxbios_rom > > If CONFIG_USE_INIF == 1, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled to > auto.o and be linked with memcpy.o....and auto.o and memcpy.o ---> > init.o > And init.o ---> part of linuxbios_rom... > Is there any reason we need two different ways to do it? If both of them are as good, can we drop one and support just the other? BTW, after reading your patch, I found there is very little difference between auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c. Most of the differences are in the included files, can we merge auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c? > > YH > > -----Original Message----- > From: linuxbios-bounces(a)openbios.org > [mailto:linuxbios-bounces@openbios.org] On Behalf Of Li-Ta Lo > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 10:31 AM > To: Stefan Reinauer > Cc: LinuxBIOS > Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies > > On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 09:26 +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > @@ -130,10 +130,10 @@ > > > ## > > > ## enable CACHE_AS_RAM specifics > > > ## > > > -default USE_DCACHE_RAM=1 > > > +default USE_DCACHE_RAM=0 > > > default DCACHE_RAM_BASE=0xcf000 > > > default DCACHE_RAM_SIZE=0x1000 > > > -default CONFIG_USE_INIT=1 > > > +default CONFIG_USE_INIT=0 > > > > > > The config files have a number of dependencies like the above. > > USE_DCACHE_RAM needs CONFIG_USE_INIT otherwise it won't work. > > > > That's something I try to figure out. If DCACHE_RAM needs USE_INIT, > why we still have > > #if CONFIG_USE_INIT == 0 > #include "lib/memcpy.c" > #endif > > in the src/mainboard/tyan/s2895/cache_as_ram_auto.c ? > > > Should we put this dependency in another place? Keeping such > > things in mind should be part of the LinuxBIOS configuration, > > not the LinuxBIOS (mainboard) developer.. > > > > Stefan > > > > > -- > Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> > Los Alamos National Lab > > -- Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> Los Alamos National Lab

3 2

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies
by Lu, Yinghai 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

Yes. -----Original Message----- From: Li-Ta Lo [mailto:ollie@lanl.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 3:34 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: Ronald G Minnich; LinuxBIOS Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 15:28 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > Great, create LinuxBIOS v3 for CAR only? > If you are trying to pass data structure from pre-sdram stage to post-sdram stage, CAR is the only option isn't it? > YH > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ronald G Minnich [mailto:rminnich@lanl.gov] > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:24 PM > To: Lu, Yinghai > Cc: Li-Ta Lo; LinuxBIOS > Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies > > Lu, Yinghai wrote: > > You want CAR only or make them coexist? > > my opinion is, that in the long term, we want CAR only. > > For every target in which CAR can be turned on, it should be turned on > and always left on. If you have CAR, you should use it always. > > ron > > -- Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> Los Alamos National Lab

1 0

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies
by Lu, Yinghai 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

Great, create LinuxBIOS v3 for CAR only? YH -----Original Message----- From: Ronald G Minnich [mailto:rminnich@lanl.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:24 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: Li-Ta Lo; LinuxBIOS Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies Lu, Yinghai wrote: > You want CAR only or make them coexist? my opinion is, that in the long term, we want CAR only. For every target in which CAR can be turned on, it should be turned on and always left on. If you have CAR, you should use it always. ron

2 1

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies
by Lu, Yinghai 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

Please look at arch/i386/include/arch/io.h Romcc need some built-in function, that can not be use gcc and cache_as_ram. So you can substitute, __ROMCC__ with __PRE_SDRAM__, it is just a symbol.... YH -----Original Message----- From: Li-Ta Lo [mailto:ollie@lanl.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:38 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: LinuxBIOS Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 14:11 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > You want CAR only or make them coexist? > Why does #define __PRE_SDRAM__ makes them non-coexist? > YH > > -----Original Message----- > From: Li-Ta Lo [mailto:ollie@lanl.gov] > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:01 PM > To: Lu, Yinghai > Cc: LinuxBIOS > Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies > > On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 13:49 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > > __ASSEMBLY__ already be used. > > > > __PRE_SDRAM__ maybe good, but if we define USE_DCACHE = 1, > > __ROMCC__is equal to __PRE_SDRAM___ it mean code will be compiled by > gcc > > instead of romcc. > > > > If we #define __PRE_SDRAM__ then we can change > > #if !defined( __ROMCC__ ) && defined( __GNUC__) > #include <device/device.h> > > to > #if !defined(__PRE_SDRAM__) > #include <device/device.h> > > Actually we should move most of the romcc_io.h into pre_dram.h > > > > YH > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: linuxbios-bounces(a)openbios.org > > [mailto:linuxbios-bounces@openbios.org] On Behalf Of Li-Ta Lo > > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 1:30 PM > > To: Lu, Yinghai > > Cc: LinuxBIOS > > Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies > > > > On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 14:21 -0600, Li-Ta Lo wrote: > > > On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 11:11 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > > > > If CONFIG_USE_INIT == 0, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled > to > > > > auto.inc. ---> part of crt0.s---> part of linuxbios_rom > > > > > > > > If CONFIG_USE_INIF == 1, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled > to > > > > auto.o and be linked with memcpy.o....and auto.o and memcpy.o ---> > > > > init.o > > > > And init.o ---> part of linuxbios_rom... > > > > > > > > > > Is there any reason we need two different ways to do it? If both of > > them > > > are as good, can we drop one and support just the other? > > > > > > BTW, after reading your patch, I found there is very little > difference > > > > > between auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c. Most of the differences are > in > > > the included files, can we merge auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c? > > > > > > > Talking about merging auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c, you are using > > #define __ROMCC__ to choose different definitions of device_t. I don't > > thing it is the right way to do it. Instead, we should use another > > macro for this (__ASSEMBLY__ or __PRE_SDRAM__)? > > > > -- > > Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> > > Los Alamos National Lab > > > > -- Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> Los Alamos National Lab

1 0

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies
by Lu, Yinghai 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

You want CAR only or make them coexist? YH -----Original Message----- From: Li-Ta Lo [mailto:ollie@lanl.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 2:01 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: LinuxBIOS Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 13:49 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > __ASSEMBLY__ already be used. > > __PRE_SDRAM__ maybe good, but if we define USE_DCACHE = 1, > __ROMCC__is equal to __PRE_SDRAM___ it mean code will be compiled by gcc > instead of romcc. > If we #define __PRE_SDRAM__ then we can change #if !defined( __ROMCC__ ) && defined( __GNUC__) #include <device/device.h> to #if !defined(__PRE_SDRAM__) #include <device/device.h> Actually we should move most of the romcc_io.h into pre_dram.h > YH > > -----Original Message----- > From: linuxbios-bounces(a)openbios.org > [mailto:linuxbios-bounces@openbios.org] On Behalf Of Li-Ta Lo > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 1:30 PM > To: Lu, Yinghai > Cc: LinuxBIOS > Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies > > On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 14:21 -0600, Li-Ta Lo wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 11:11 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > > > If CONFIG_USE_INIT == 0, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled to > > > auto.inc. ---> part of crt0.s---> part of linuxbios_rom > > > > > > If CONFIG_USE_INIF == 1, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled to > > > auto.o and be linked with memcpy.o....and auto.o and memcpy.o ---> > > > init.o > > > And init.o ---> part of linuxbios_rom... > > > > > > > Is there any reason we need two different ways to do it? If both of > them > > are as good, can we drop one and support just the other? > > > > BTW, after reading your patch, I found there is very little difference > > > between auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c. Most of the differences are in > > the included files, can we merge auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c? > > > > Talking about merging auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c, you are using > #define __ROMCC__ to choose different definitions of device_t. I don't > thing it is the right way to do it. Instead, we should use another > macro for this (__ASSEMBLY__ or __PRE_SDRAM__)? > > -- > Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> > Los Alamos National Lab > > -- Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> Los Alamos National Lab

3 2

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies
by Lu, Yinghai 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

CONFIG_USE_INIT 1. car as ram is messed up with inline assembly, So We can check up the auto.inc that gcc produced to verify if the inline assembly is well with other lines from C. 2. ...., the same, except We rename some section name. Why only cache_as_ram_auto.c 1. then will be section name conflicts to create crt0.s (CONFIG_USE_INIT==0) or init.o (CONFIG_USE_INIT==1) 2. with ROMCC, you can not put these info in reg, it may need 4K bytes. Also for support new CPU or sync different CPU freq to common freq, I need to separate HT freq optimization with coherent_ht and ht_chain. So need to store all link info for optimization later....... YH -----Original Message----- From: Li-Ta Lo [mailto:ollie@lanl.gov] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 1:56 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: Stefan Reinauer; LinuxBIOS; Greg Watson Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 13:45 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > No > 1. CONFIG_USE_INIT==0 is very useful for debug. Why?? > 2. CONFIG_USE_INIT==1 is something ppc car using... > AFIAK, the way you are using USE_INIT is totally different from what Greg is doing on PPC. I am not an expert on this issue but I believe the only common thing in these two is the same macro name. Greg, can you have some comment on this? > Auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c is very different > 1. cache_as_ram_auto include failover.c Why do you do that? Why don't you have cache_as_ram_failover.c too? > 2. later cache_as_ram_auto will have struct sys_info sysinfox, and it > will include every info include dimm.....and we don't need to keep read > smbus and pci conf space for.... > Any reason it has to be in cache_as_ram_auto only? >

1 0

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies
by Lu, Yinghai 28 Oct '05

28 Oct '05

__ASSEMBLY__ already be used. __PRE_SDRAM__ maybe good, but if we define USE_DCACHE = 1, __ROMCC__is equal to __PRE_SDRAM___ it mean code will be compiled by gcc instead of romcc. YH -----Original Message----- From: linuxbios-bounces(a)openbios.org [mailto:linuxbios-bounces@openbios.org] On Behalf Of Li-Ta Lo Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 1:30 PM To: Lu, Yinghai Cc: LinuxBIOS Subject: RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 14:21 -0600, Li-Ta Lo wrote: > On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 11:11 -0700, Lu, Yinghai wrote: > > If CONFIG_USE_INIT == 0, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled to > > auto.inc. ---> part of crt0.s---> part of linuxbios_rom > > > > If CONFIG_USE_INIF == 1, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled to > > auto.o and be linked with memcpy.o....and auto.o and memcpy.o ---> > > init.o > > And init.o ---> part of linuxbios_rom... > > > > Is there any reason we need two different ways to do it? If both of them > are as good, can we drop one and support just the other? > > BTW, after reading your patch, I found there is very little difference > between auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c. Most of the differences are in > the included files, can we merge auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c? > Talking about merging auto.c and cache_as_ram_auto.c, you are using #define __ROMCC__ to choose different definitions of device_t. I don't thing it is the right way to do it. Instead, we should use another macro for this (__ASSEMBLY__ or __PRE_SDRAM__)? -- Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> Los Alamos National Lab -- LinuxBIOS mailing list LinuxBIOS(a)openbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios

2 1

RE: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies
by Lu, Yinghai 27 Oct '05

27 Oct '05

If CONFIG_USE_INIT == 0, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled to auto.inc. ---> part of crt0.s---> part of linuxbios_rom If CONFIG_USE_INIF == 1, the cache_as_ram_auto.c will be compiled to auto.o and be linked with memcpy.o....and auto.o and memcpy.o ---> init.o And init.o ---> part of linuxbios_rom... YH -----Original Message----- From: linuxbios-bounces(a)openbios.org [mailto:linuxbios-bounces@openbios.org] On Behalf Of Li-Ta Lo Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 10:31 AM To: Stefan Reinauer Cc: LinuxBIOS Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Config file dependencies On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 09:26 +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > Hi, > > > @@ -130,10 +130,10 @@ > > ## > > ## enable CACHE_AS_RAM specifics > > ## > > -default USE_DCACHE_RAM=1 > > +default USE_DCACHE_RAM=0 > > default DCACHE_RAM_BASE=0xcf000 > > default DCACHE_RAM_SIZE=0x1000 > > -default CONFIG_USE_INIT=1 > > +default CONFIG_USE_INIT=0 > > > The config files have a number of dependencies like the above. > USE_DCACHE_RAM needs CONFIG_USE_INIT otherwise it won't work. > That's something I try to figure out. If DCACHE_RAM needs USE_INIT, why we still have #if CONFIG_USE_INIT == 0 #include "lib/memcpy.c" #endif in the src/mainboard/tyan/s2895/cache_as_ram_auto.c ? > Should we put this dependency in another place? Keeping such > things in mind should be part of the LinuxBIOS configuration, > not the LinuxBIOS (mainboard) developer.. > > Stefan > > -- Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> Los Alamos National Lab -- LinuxBIOS mailing list LinuxBIOS(a)openbios.org http://www.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios

2 2

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot