On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 7:33 AM, Aaron Durbin adurbin@google.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 4:40 AM, Paul Menzel paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net wrote:
Dear coreboot folks,
on the ASRock E350M1, I lately noticed that the SeaBIOS banner takes longer to appear. And looking at the logs board status [1], the time stamps stored in CBMEM confirm this.
What were your typical times like?
$ grep 1st asrock/e350m1/4.2-*/*/coreboot_timestamps.txt asrock/e350m1/4.2-33-g42444f6/2015-10-30T17:54:28Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 368,199 asrock/e350m1/4.2-36-g0ace013/2015-10-31T13:22:12Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 368,416 asrock/e350m1/4.2-37-gab35575/2015-10-31T18:23:47Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 367,904 asrock/e350m1/4.2-41-g3c47e8a/2015-10-31T20:39:02Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 367,829 asrock/e350m1/4.2-42-g0746452/2015-10-31T21:11:04Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 368,081 asrock/e350m1/4.2-43-g160ad6a/2015-10-31T21:12:09Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 368,290 asrock/e350m1/4.2-44-gbabb2e6/2015-10-31T21:14:48Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 368,023 asrock/e350m1/4.2-53-gf6dc544/2015-11-01T13:27:02Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 368,470 asrock/e350m1/4.2-58-g65eec4d/2015-11-02T15:41:33Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 679,462 asrock/e350m1/4.2-628-g62c0276/2015-12-29T17:17:01Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 1,528,198 asrock/e350m1/4.2-701-gb95a074/2016-01-08T01:44:15Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 1,298,841 asrock/e350m1/4.2-702-gfecc24a/2016-01-08T16:21:59Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 1,289,489 asrock/e350m1/4.2-703-g8846382/2016-01-09T21:18:59Z/coreboot_timestamps.txt: 0:1st timestamp 1,289,756Unfortunately, there was a time, where I had forgotten to select this option, so I am still bisecting this.
I thought, it might have been fixed with the commit 4.2-630-g65e33c0 below [1], but it’s not.
commit 65e33c08a9a88c52baaadaf515b9591856115a77 Author: Nico Huber <nico.huber@secunet.com> Date: Mon Dec 28 20:17:13 2015 +0100 x86: Align CBFS on top of ROM Since the introduction of the new (interim?) master header, coreboot searches the whole ROM for CBFS entries. Fix that by aligning it on top of the ROM. Change-Id: I080cd4b746169a36462a49baff5e114b1f6f224a […]Do you know, which commit the commit message referred to?
Looking more into it, Nico’s commit was reverted in commit 4.2-673- g12c55ed [3] and the logic reworked.
commit 12c55eda11453ed1e7a24e218338831f67cd5de6 Author: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org> Date: Mon Jan 4 13:57:07 2016 -0600 Revert "x86: Align CBFS on top of ROM" This reverts commit 65e33c08a9a88c52baaadaf515b9591856115a77. This was the wrong logic to fix the master header. Change-Id: I4688034831f09ac69abfd0660c76112deabd62ec […]If you have any suggestions, please tell me. Otherwise, I’d continue trying to bisect this.
And unfortunately, I am unable to provide romstage messages, as I still haven’t got the serial header for the board.
So if somebody else, Stefan, Martin, Kevin, could provide that, that would be awesome.
Did you rebuild cbfstool that contains this patch? https://review.coreboot.org/12825 It was the one I said fixed the logic when you asked in https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/12824/. Additionally, there's also the comments I left in https://review.coreboot.org/12810 that explained how that patch was incorrect.
Please provide a hexdump snippet (hexdump -C image.rom) that shows the "ORBC" section. That's the master header, and we can analyze if you did indeed build w/ an updated cbfstool as well as determine if there are other issues.
I just looked at the 703-* log:
CBFS: 'Master Header Locator' located CBFS at [100:3fffc0)
That corresponds w/ your config: CONFIG_CBFS_SIZE=0x400000 CONFIG_ROM_SIZE=0x400000
So that's all correct. It's not cbfs as far as I can tell (seems unlikely). I suspect that your timestamps are just more correct. Where does your first timestamp original from? Is that in ramstage?
Thanks,
Paul
PS: I’ll try to create a ticket for this issue in the bug tracker [4] this evening.
[1] https://review.coreboot.org/gitweb?p=board-status.git;a=summary [2] https://review.coreboot.org/12810 [3] https://review.coreboot.org/12824 [4] https://ticket.coreboot.org/ -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot