coreboot

coreboot@coreboot.org

11 participants
39712 discussions

RE: flash_rom on SST49LF004B tips?
by YhLu 03 Nov '04

03 Nov '04

That should be kernel 2.6 bug under 64bit: the last 4k near 4G can not be accessed when 4G RAM installed. Regards YH -----Original Message----- From: Li-Ta Lo [mailto:ollie@lanl.gov] Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 9:10 AM To: Ronald G. Minnich Cc: Donald Zoch; Hendricks David W.; LinuxBIOS Subject: Re: flash_rom on SST49LF004B tips? On Wed, 2004-11-03 at 09:53, Ronald G. Minnich wrote: > On Mon, 1 Nov 2004, Donald Zoch wrote: > > > I'm trying to get the flash_rom program working on the SST49LF004B. > > This is the part that is coming in our newer Arima HDAMA boards that > > replaces the SST49LF040. It has the same id as the SST49LF004A, > > but is different in that when we first started trying to flash it, the > > flash looked like it worked but would never verify. I took a look > > at the data sheet and from the looks of it there are these block locking > > registers that the zero bit must be cleared in in order to write to > > certain parts of the flash. At least that's why I think it's not > > flashing. > > I did a part like that already, the sst 49lf008a. > > Look in flash_rom. It works fine. > BTW, there is some unknown proble to flash some SST flash in 64-bit mode. I have no idea why. It works perfectly in 32-bit mode. Ollie > ron > _______________________________________________ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios(a)clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios

1 0

Re: tagging freebios2 tree
by ebiederman＠lnxi.com 03 Nov '04

03 Nov '04

Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> writes: > On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 19:07, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > No quite I put the cpu_info structure at the bottom of the stack, > > and this function looks it up. > > > > The same idea has been used in the kernel for quite a while. > > > > Basically this allows me to preallocate some per cpu information > > and to pass that into cpu_initialize from another cpu. > > > > The linux kernel has been doing something similar for quite a while. > > > > Does cpu_info() return different value depends on which CPU it is > running ? Yes. The stack is per cpu and it returns a fixed address from the stack structure. > Are the data structures per CPU or shared between CPUs ? per-cpu. Which is the point. Eric

2 1

some questions about nForce and LinuxBIOS
by Kory Herzinger 03 Nov '04

03 Nov '04

I am working on my senior project in college, and have run into a slight issue with how long it takes for my BIOS to POST. I would like LinuxBIOS to boot my system into a minimal Linux kernel in as little amount of time as necessary, and then have that kernel boot into a Linux system I've already built and configured on the hard drive. From doing some research on your project I've found that this goes by the catchy name of LOBOS :-) From the kernel that the LinuxBIOS will boot, I don't need network, sound, or video support. I'd like to leave it up to the existing Linux installation on my hard drive to bring up these devices for me. Here's the specs on the board I am using: Northbridge: NForce2 Crush 18G IGP chipset Southbridge: MCP chipset / High-speed interface to the MCP OnBoard GFX: NVidia GeForce4 MX The board has support for TV composite signal-out which I will be using once the system is up and running, but since nVidia doesn't release specs or source for their hardware, I obviously can't use it during the BIOS phase. So I guess the real questions are: 1) Is it possible to build a LinuxBIOS that will run on my system? 2) If so, since the support for network, sound, and audio devices will not be present in the BIOS, can I still bring them up in my Linux kernel using the proprietary drivers distributed by nVidia? 3) If the above two scenarios are possible, could I throw my linux system currently on the hard drive into a NVRAM device and boot it from there to further reduce boot time? I appreciate your help with this. If you are interested in my senior project, there is information on my project website: www.novagameconsole.com Anything you can offer is greatly appreciated! Thanks! --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a

3 2

i845GV ddr sdram init passed
by zhu shi song 03 Nov '04

03 Nov '04

After working hard for three day, I have made i845gv ddr sdram work well. I can boot linux 2.4.27 with root filesystem on my hard disk. But linux 2.4.27 support new hardware weakly. So I hope I can boot linux 2.6. I have before used initrd dyn invented by l inux router project to boot linux 2.4. I like the way booting linux. (1) Who knows can initrd dyn support linux 2.6. I know the latest version of initrd dyn is for linux2.5.54. (2) If unfortunately I can't use initrd dyn again, how can I make my root fs? how can I boot linux 2.6 using tar.gz file as root filesystem? tks zhu __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com

1 0

RE: tagging freebios2 tree
by YhLu 03 Nov '04

03 Nov '04

For DP Xeon MB, CONFIG_MAX_CPUS should be 4 or 2? It is used only by you said stack.... config/linuxbios_ram.ld: . = (CONFIG_MAX_CPUS * STACK_SIZE) ; cpu/x86/pae/pgtbl.c: static struct pg_table pgtbl[CONFIG_MAX_CPUS] __attribute__ ((aligned(4096))); cpu/x86/pae/pgtbl.c: static unsigned long mapped_window[CONFIG_MAX_CPUS]; cpu/x86/pae/pgtbl.c: if ((index < 0) || (index >= CONFIG_MAX_CPUS)) { YH -----Original Message----- From: ebiederman(a)lnxi.com [mailto:ebiederman@lnxi.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 5:06 PM To: Li-Ta Lo Cc: LinuxBIOS Subject: Re: tagging freebios2 tree Li-Ta Lo <ollie(a)lanl.gov> writes: > On Tue, 2004-08-24 at 19:07, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > No quite I put the cpu_info structure at the bottom of the stack, > > and this function looks it up. > > > > The same idea has been used in the kernel for quite a while. > > > > Basically this allows me to preallocate some per cpu information > > and to pass that into cpu_initialize from another cpu. > > > > The linux kernel has been doing something similar for quite a while. > > > > Does cpu_info() return different value depends on which CPU it is > running ? Yes. The stack is per cpu and it returns a fixed address from the stack structure. > Are the data structures per CPU or shared between CPUs ? per-cpu. Which is the point. Eric _______________________________________________ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios(a)clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios

2 1

RE: Weird K8 output
by YhLu 03 Nov '04

03 Nov '04

I removed the udev and upos in ht_chains. Commited. CVS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- CVS: Enter Log. Lines beginning with `CVS:' are removed automatically CVS: CVS: Committing in . CVS: CVS: Modified Files: CVS: src/mainboard/amd/quartet/auto.c CVS: src/mainboard/tyan/s2885/auto.c CVS: src/northbridge/amd/amdk8/incoherent_ht.c CVS: ----------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

status information
by Stefan Reinauer 02 Nov '04

02 Nov '04

Hi, the "reference build" arima hdama seems to be too big when being compiled with gcc 3.3.1 or 3.3.3.. See attached log file. Please, if anyone has time and test capabilities, have an eye on the non working ports and try to submit fixes. Stefan

7 37

RE: Weird K8 output
by YhLu 02 Nov '04

02 Nov '04

Can you let us know the incoherent device in CPU 0....CPU3..? Some device unit id can not be changed? For examples, you set it from 0 to 1, it will still be 0. So it hang there.... Regards YH -----Original Message----- From: YhLu Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 4:07 PM To: 'Stefan Reinauer' Cc: linuxbios(a)clustermatic.org Subject: RE: Weird K8 output Yes, You are right, You can change to // upos = ht_c[i].upos; upos = ((reg & 0xf00)>>8) * 0x20 + 0x80; last time, I remember because it will use up regs. But this time seems OK. regards Yinghai Lu -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Reinauer [mailto:stepan@openbios.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:31 PM To: YhLu Subject: Re: Weird K8 output * YhLu <YhLu(a)tyan.com> [041102 21:27]: > MB Model? > HT routing table? It was too loud (LOGLEVEL 9) BUT: > coherent_ht_finalize > done > PCI_DEV=(0,0x18,0) 0xb4=00030000 > bus=00 id =74501022 > bus=00 id =74601022 > PCI_DEV=(0,0x19,0) 0xd4=000a0400 <HANGS HERE> static int ht_setup_chains(const struct ht_chain *ht_c, int ht_c_num) takes: [...] { /* Link 1 of CPU0 */ .udev = PCI_DEV(0, 0x18, 0), .upos = 0xa0, .devreg = 0xe0, }, { /* Link 2 of CPU1 */ .udev = PCI_DEV(0, 0x19, 0), .upos = 0xc0, .devreg = 0xe4, }, [...] and resourcemap.c: PCI_ADDR(0, 0x18, 1, 0xE0), 0x0000FC88, 0x03000103, PCI_ADDR(0, 0x18, 1, 0xE4), 0x0000FC88, 0x0a040213, PCI_ADDR(0, 0x18, 1, 0xE8), 0x0000FC88, 0x0f0b0223, PCI_ADDR(0, 0x18, 1, 0xEC), 0x0000FC88, 0x14100133, Question1: I took the bus numbers above from the running machine. is this wrong? How would I calculate them correctly? Question2: isn't .upos duplicate? ht_setup_chains reads the link to choose from .devreg. It could determine .upos from there as well, no? Stefan

1 0

RE: Weird K8 output
by YhLu 02 Nov '04

02 Nov '04

Only two times Once in crt0 One in LinuxBIOS_ram. Device. Besides updating unitid, device scan need to update bus number too. Regards Yinghai Lu -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Reinauer [mailto:stepan@openbios.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 4:07 PM To: YhLu Cc: linuxbios(a)clustermatic.org Subject: Re: Weird K8 output * Stefan Reinauer <stepan(a)openbios.org> [041103 00:49]: > * YhLu <YhLu(a)tyan.com> [041102 21:27]: > > done > > PCI_DEV=(0,0x18,0) 0xb4=00030000 > > bus=00 id =74501022 > > bus=00 id =74601022 > > PCI_DEV=(0,0x19,0) 0xd4=000a0400 > > Hm.. it dies here while collapsing the previous enumeration. While collapsing 74501022 again... Can anyone shed some light on why the repeated collapse is needed? Stefan

2 1

RE: Weird K8 output
by YhLu 02 Nov '04

02 Nov '04

Yes, You are right, You can change to // upos = ht_c[i].upos; upos = ((reg & 0xf00)>>8) * 0x20 + 0x80; last time, I remember because it will use up regs. But this time seems OK. regards Yinghai Lu -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Reinauer [mailto:stepan@openbios.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:31 PM To: YhLu Subject: Re: Weird K8 output * YhLu <YhLu(a)tyan.com> [041102 21:27]: > MB Model? > HT routing table? It was too loud (LOGLEVEL 9) BUT: > coherent_ht_finalize > done > PCI_DEV=(0,0x18,0) 0xb4=00030000 > bus=00 id =74501022 > bus=00 id =74601022 > PCI_DEV=(0,0x19,0) 0xd4=000a0400 <HANGS HERE> static int ht_setup_chains(const struct ht_chain *ht_c, int ht_c_num) takes: [...] { /* Link 1 of CPU0 */ .udev = PCI_DEV(0, 0x18, 0), .upos = 0xa0, .devreg = 0xe0, }, { /* Link 2 of CPU1 */ .udev = PCI_DEV(0, 0x19, 0), .upos = 0xc0, .devreg = 0xe4, }, [...] and resourcemap.c: PCI_ADDR(0, 0x18, 1, 0xE0), 0x0000FC88, 0x03000103, PCI_ADDR(0, 0x18, 1, 0xE4), 0x0000FC88, 0x0a040213, PCI_ADDR(0, 0x18, 1, 0xE8), 0x0000FC88, 0x0f0b0223, PCI_ADDR(0, 0x18, 1, 0xEC), 0x0000FC88, 0x14100133, Question1: I took the bus numbers above from the running machine. is this wrong? How would I calculate them correctly? Question2: isn't .upos duplicate? ht_setup_chains reads the link to choose from .devreg. It could determine .upos from there as well, no? Stefan

1 0

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