Nov 5, 2021, 14:10 by nico.h@gmx.de:
On 05.11.21 18:58, Martin Roth wrote:
This binary is also mandatory for the elkhart lake platform, so to support this platform, loading this is required, whether it's built from source as a part of the coreboot build or supplied as a blob.
That's not true. Just rumors?
This is what was reported by the intel representative in the leadership meeting. I can't say whether it's true or not, this is however what was reported.
If it's optional though, then why do you even care, just don't use it and default it to off. If other people want to be able to use it, why are you concerned about preventing them?
The decision at the leadership meeting was to allow this binary to be loaded by coreboot, so long as the PSE acts like an EC, and does not have access to the X86 memory space.
The discussion happened under a false pretext and with outdated information. Also, the PSE is nothing like an EC. Hint: does an EC do parts of the SoC silicon init that would usually be done by our ramstage?
Then you shouldn't be worried. It was decided to accept it *so long as the PSE acts like an EC* as i said above. If that's not actually the case, then Sheng won't be able to show that it acts like an EC and there's no issue. Though if it's actually optional, again, what's the issue?
What is it that it does that's normally done by coreboot's ramstage?
Maybe to avoid wasting time with premature decisions, we should make up some guidelines? For instance, first discuss something on the mailing list, then in the leadership meeting? This way people could at least get a little information before they make decisions.
There are lots of options here: - There's an agenda that's posted before the meeting. Other things do come up in the meeting, but this item had been posted for at least a week before the leadership meeting, so there was plenty of time to look at it and decide whether or not to come. - People who believe they have information to share or want their opinions heard can come to the leadership meeting. If they aren't there, they don't get to voice an opinion in the meeting. - People can respond to the meeting minutes when they're posted to the mailing list or look at the minutes in the document.
Ultimately, the decision about the direction that the coreboot project is going to go is decided by the coreboot leaders, currently Stefan, Werner, and David. Sure, discussions can happen on the mailing list, but the leadership meeting is where the decisions get made.
I've added your suggestion about requiring discussions on the mailing list to the meeting minutes of the next meeting. If you'd like to discuss the idea in the meeting, please attend.
The load method wasn't discussed beyond what's in CB:55367, so if there's a different load method that's desired, that could be acceptable, but I think we can close the discussion on whether or not to allow the binary loader to be added, provided Sheng can show that this part doesn't have security implications for the X86 side.
Interesting point about the security. I'm also curious. I couldn't find anything about the mentioned MMU in Intel's docs.
Nico
PS. Please have a look at the available documentation before making decisions.
And again, the decision was made conditionally upon the information we were given. If you want to voice concerns, please come to the meetings.
Martin