Re: [LinuxBIOS] Very confused about ram initialization

[Jon Dufresne]

Well, I think with the couple of tips and extra documentation (I
didn't know about the JEDEC docs) I'll keep chugging away at this
until the boss says to give it up. I would much rather use LinuxBIOS
on our product than a proprietary bios.

I did try using the register values from a known BIOS. However, that
didn't work as it isn't a static configuration. The docs do outline
many registers in the memory controller, but I have notice that when I
manipulate some undocumented ones to the values seen in a working bios
I get further (although not much) in the boot, leaving me to believe
not all the registers are documented :(.

Anyway I haven't given up yet, but at the same time, I won't be too
surprised if this doesn't work out.

Jon

On 11/29/06, Drew Lundsten  wrote:
> This is depressing, definitely. You did try copying the register values
> seen in a booted board?
>
> And I assume you do have the datasheet that's on Intel's public site? At
> least the registers are defined there, although it doesn't give you the
> sequence needed to use them optimally.
>
> Drew Lundsten  [phone]/619-895-1764 cell
> Continuous Computing Corporation, 9380 Carroll Park Dr, San Diego 92121
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: linuxbios-bounces+drew.lundsten=[e-mail]
> [mailto:linuxbios-bounces+drew.lundsten=[e-mail]] On
> Behalf Of Jon Dufresne
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 5:12 PM
> To: ron minnich
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [LinuxBIOS] Very confused about ram initialization
>
> Well that is a bummer, I was having fun (accompanied by frustration)
> trying to get this to work. Thanks for all the help I received up to
> this point.
>
> Jon
>
> On 11/29/06, ron minnich  wrote:
> > I hate to say it, but you are going to probably have to give up on
> > that chipset absent docs. I have the "DOCS" as intel ships them from
> > developer.intel.com, and, unlike what you could get in 1999, the
> > current set of docs are totally worthless for writing a BIOS. I am
> > told this is intentional. I have had it put to me that this policy
> > simplifies EFI lockin -- no competition.
> >
> > Sorry
> >
> > ron