>AMD contracted SilverBack for the tasks on StoneyRidge (and
>MerlinFalcon apparently). The source is a heavily modified StoneyPI
>package. You may get the unmodified one from AMD reps under NDA. Or
>pay SilverBack for the development you would be more capable of doing
>yourself, and you still might not get a license that allows
>distributing the work. There was a promise of scrubbing and
>relicensing StoneyPI source but... Let's just say legalities messed it
>up, I don't have the details.

Yes, the AMD reps we're in touch answer me to get in touch with SilverBack to get support :(
We've been able to get a more recent StoneyPI_1_3_0_A.ZIP under NDA because I've seen

maybe related with our problem, but I don't know how to integrate this code into coreboot...

And if you say that the current work in coreboot is from a heavily modified base from SilverBack

I don't have any chance to make it work...

>As for the the other blobs (MullinsPI, CarrizoPI, KaveriPI), those
>were either built at SAGE (R.I.P.) or AMD AES (R.I.P.) and I have been
>told the repositories and toolchains were never officially transferred
>to SilverBack's possession. In other words, even if you paid,
>SilverBack is not likely to work on those.

Then, no more options to get a working BIOS than SilverBack?

>I believe we have talked before. Maybe it was about CarrizoPI? I was
>asking for commercial adopters around coreboot and binaryPI, in
>attempts to get to the same negotiation table with AMD management. Did
>You or Your manager ever respond?

Yes. I began asking in the coreboot mailing list about the Bettong mainboard. I added TPM support

and tianocore to that demoboard. I remember the email and I answered it giving my support because

we thought coreboot is the way to go to support our custom board.

Regards,
Jorge