coreboot

coreboot@coreboot.org

6 participants
39574 discussions

remap_high in the e7500 northbridge
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

Does this mean remap memory to 4GB + or remap high memory to low memory space. I think I have been misunderstanding it. ron

2 2

E7500
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

Status: - working fallback linuxbios that was built on redhat 7.3 w/ gcc 2.96 (bogus redhat version :-) - trying to get a supermicro p4dpe to work on redhat 8.0 - kernel+initrd is loaded from IDE-flash via etherboot. This is a bproc "phase 1" kernel, and will download and boot a "phase 2" kernel. The phase 1 kernel is non-smp, and should use PIRQ tables or similar to set up IRQs, it turns out. It appears not to be MP-table aware. The phase 2 kernel is SMP- and MP-table aware. If I build linuxbios with gcc 3.2, it loads the phase 1 kernel but ... that kernel can't find any interrupts for the myrinet card. If I build linuxbios with gcc 2.96, that kernel can find interrupts and download the phase 2 kernel. The phase 2 kernel finds the MP table and gets everything ready to go, but panics when trying to set up the initrd for reasons that are not clear. It seems to think it has 4 GB memory, when it fact it has 1 GB memory with a big memory hole. Can Linux 2.4.19 handle this kind of sparse memory map? right now, experience is saying "no", although I thought this was working. Now I think I need to look at the PIRQ table as compiled by gcc 3.2. The MP table seems to be created just fine. Interesting. ron

2 1

GCC 3.2 can now build linuxbios
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

The simple change I made to irq_table did the trick. Myrinet drivers are now finding their IRQ. Now to find the next problem ... RAMDISK: Couldn't find valid RAM disk image starting at 0. Freeing initrd memory: 741k freed Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on 01:00 :-) ron

1 0

sis730s manual
by Fredy Setiadji 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

where can i find the sis730s manual and register sets? thanks, fredy __________________________________________________________________ Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de Weihnachts-Einkäufe ohne Stress! http://shopping.yahoo.de

2 3

committed fix for irq_tables
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

All gcc 2.x users are now going to get a warning on the irq_tables.c compile. Sorry, but it will produce the right table, and 3.x will also produce the right table. I've confirmed this by comparing the .o files that both gcc's produce. This may fix some of the problems 3.x users have been reporting. I will confirm a good linuxbios-based boot as soon as I get in to work -- it's snowing here so we have 2-hour delays today. ron

1 0

It's the IRQ table
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

gcc 3.2 when it compiles the PIRQ table gives me utterly different results from 2.96. I now have something to look at. ron

3 2

linuxbios and gcc 3.2: got it.
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

it's a fundamental disagreement between 3.2 and 2.96. I think 3.2 is right, 2.96 is wrong. But it bit us, because we conformed to 2.96 usage. Consider the following: struct thing { int z; }; struct thingy { int a; struct thing t[1]; }; This is like our irq_table struct now. We wish to have the array t be variable-sized, and the way you get that in gcc 2 is to just initialize it as needed: struct thingy x = {1, {{2}, {3}}}; t will be forced to grow as needed. What a kludge! We declare it as t[1], but then grow it by making the initializer too big! What does gcc 3.2 do with this? Well, that's a good question. I've seen a few different results from gcc: - complain, and product a truncated output file with no entries - not even produce an output file. - in no case does what it does match what gcc 2 did gcc 3.2 does the sane thing in my view. If you make the array [1], that's all you should get. Growing it with too big an initializer is ugly! So how to declare this? Like this: struct thing { int z; }; struct thingy { int a; struct thing t[]; }; ^^^ struct thingy x = {1, {{2}, {3}}}; This works fine. I am going to modify the irq_table struct, since gcc296 complains about the [] but still produces the right code. My mistake was zeroing in on the mptable, not the irq_table, because I forgot that our phase 1 image in IDE-flash is a non-SMP kernel. But it was a good thing in the end as I found this nasty non-compliant (for 3.2) bit of code in linuxbios. ron

1 0

linuxbios (fwd)
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

any hints? zengqi, please send these messages to this list. I don't have time right now to help you. Sorry! ron ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 01:29:32 +0800 From: To: Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich(a)lanl.gov> Subject: linuxbios Dear Mr Ronald G Now I have two issues about Linux-BIOS booting IDE ,I hope you can help me! 1)I hope my computer boot from Linux-BIOS and load kernel from IDE harddisk, not from DOC.SO I add "BOOT_IDE=1" into m758lmr+.config ,but when I use the command as follow: linuxbios.init m758lmr+.config ,linux.bin.gz, linuxbios.strip and docipl can not be created.(Before I add BOOT_IDE , the command was worked well),why? 2)In linux ,After I insert two modules the DOC2000 and Docprobe (doc_config_location=0xfffc8000 )and use command "flash_on",I can recognize DOC . The problem is that I can not recognize DOC in DOS.(I would like to use tooling such as DINFO or DFORMAT to serch DOC,but failed),why? the hardware : a. pcchips m758lmr+ b. two bios :linuxbios and normal bios the kernel of linux is 2.4.19 regards Zengqi

2 1

help! (fwd)
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

can someone help xu? ron ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 18:39:42 +0800 From: xu xuning <xuning1979(a)hotmail.com> To: rminnich(a)lanl.gov Subject: help! Mr.Ronald G. Minnich how are you ! I have used pre-made image from http://www.cwlinux.com/download/ and success start from my doc,my mainboard is Winfast6300 MA Pro. and now i have two questions to ask you : one : how to mount /dev/hda1 (my harddisk),because i found in my system on doc have "/dev/hda*",but when i run " # mount /dev/hda1 /home/disk/" the result is a error,so can you tell me HOWTO? two: how to mount usb-memory (e.g.onlydisk),i know in Red Hat Linux7.2 is "# mount /dev/sda /home/usb/",but in my system on doc there is no /dev/sda*,So how to do ? Thanks a lot! XuNing _________________________________________________________________ ÓëÁª»úµÄÅóÓÑ½øÐÐ½»Á÷£¬ÇëÊ¹ÓÃ MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com/cn

1 0

mptable and redhat 8 and wotta mess.
by Ronald G. Minnich 03 Dec '02

03 Dec '02

If I build linuxbios with gcc 2.96, things get marginally better. But weirder. Linux version 2.4.19-lanl.18beoboot (root@butthead) (gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-112)) #1 Fri Aug 16 15:03:04 MDT 2002 BIOS-provided physical RAM map: BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 0000000000000bd0 (reserved) BIOS-e820: 0000000000000bd0 - 00000000000a0000 (usable) BIOS-e820: 00000000000f0000 - 00000000000f0400 (reserved) BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 0000000020000000 (usable) BIOS-e820: 0000000100000000 - 0000000120000000 (usable) Warning only 896MB will be used. Use a PAE enabled kernel. 896MB LOWMEM available. hm, page 00000000 reserved twice. On node 0 totalpages: 229376 note that it is still not seeing the MP table. But later on: PCI: Discovered primary peer bus 10 [IRQ] PCI: Discovered primary peer bus 11 [IRQ] PCI: Discovered primary peer bus 12 [IRQ] PCI: Using IRQ router PIIX [8086/2480] at 00:1f.0 PCI: Found IRQ 11 for device 00:1d.0 PCI: Sharing IRQ 11 with 07:01.0 PCI: Found IRQ 5 for device 00:1f.1 PCI: Found IRQ 3 for device 00:1f.3 PCI: Found IRQ 7 for device 02:01.0 So how is it getting this info? I am now getting confused. nevertheless it does get the new kernel fine over the myrinet. The ram map still looks like this: BIOS-provided physical RAM map: BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 0000000000000bd0 (reserved) BIOS-e820: 0000000000000bd0 - 00000000000a0000 (usable) BIOS-e820: 00000000000f0000 - 00000000000f0400 (reserved) BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 0000000020000000 (usable) BIOS-e820: 0000000100000000 - 0000000120000000 (usable) Note also that the RAM map shows (for this newer linuxbios) a big hole in the ram map. 2.4.19 doesn't seem to be able to handle this, more below: Warning only 4GB will be used. Use a PAE enabled kernel. 3200MB HIGHMEM available. OOPS! There's only 1024 MB but the kernel is doing something odd. Now the older linuxbios (a version from LNXI that says 1.0.0.6) show this for the ram map: BIOS-provided physical RAM map: BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 0000000000000b54 (reserved) BIOS-e820: 0000000000000b54 - 00000000000a0000 (usable) BIOS-e820: 00000000000f0000 - 00000000000f0400 (reserved) BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 0000000040000000 (usable) 128MB HIGHMEM available. 896MB LOWMEM available. And this works. So, that's the state of play: linuxbios is now producing e820 maps that 2.4.19 doesn't seem to be able to handle; something is somehow trashing the MP table (etherboot); and, in general, things on e7500 are not currently working. More later. ron

3 2

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

coreboot