18 Oct
2008
18 Oct
'08
2:36 a.m.
On 18/10/08 00:28 +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
On 17.10.2008 23:57, Myles Watson wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net mailto:c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net> wrote:
On 17.10.2008 19:46, Jordan Crouse wrote: > On 17/10/08 11:29 -0600, Myles Watson wrote: > >> I haven't looked into the cause yet, but the boot log looks a little "funny" >> in coreinfo. At least it's smiling. >> > > Hmm - that is very unfortunate. I think we have boot log issues - I have > also discovered that the bootlog is apparently overwriting the v3 > coreboot tables. This could be a consequence of that. > Is there any old version where you don't see the issues on qemu?Yes. I know when it was a new feature I tried it out and didn't see this garbage.
I remember it working well some time ago. It would be great if you could do a binary search and narrow it down. I can then fix the problem.
I don't ever remember it working exactly right. If you look at the output, it matches what ever is living at physical address 0x0 - at least for the first page or so. Clearly there is come contention here.
Jordan