With all due respect, dropping support for the majority of AMD boards
- with a quite significant community around them! - doesn't seem like
a wise decision, if we still care about the coreboot marketshare on the worldwide-available consumer PCs. Small improvement in the common source, but a huge loss of boards? (almost 50!). For the sake of the bright future of the coreboot project, this must be prevented at all costs...
If there is such a community around those boards there must be someone willing to either invest time or money to implement the proposed improvements. Having boards or platforms inside the tree is much cheaper than paying AMI for a crappy closed source BIOS/UEFI. It's still not a free endeavor and code requires maintenance from time to time such that development on the master branch can remain simple and sensible. Not maintaining code from time to time and enforcing some features, is probably far worse for the project.
Some time ago I did https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/41431 change where tried to get a resource allocator V4 working for these AGESA boards, and despite a tiny size (less than 20 lines) - it almost worked, judging by that fam15h A88XM-E booted fine (although there might have been some other problems undercover). I wonder if it could help and will be happy to test the new changes related to this.
The proposed change requires the code to know what memory regions are used and must be reserved. Angel already reviewed the patch it seems, so that's probably a good start.
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 9:16 PM Mike Banon mikebdp2@gmail.com wrote:
With all due respect, dropping support for the majority of AMD boards
- with a quite significant community around them! - doesn't seem like
a wise decision, if we still care about the coreboot marketshare on the worldwide-available consumer PCs. Small improvement in the common source, but a huge loss of boards? (almost 50!). For the sake of the bright future of the coreboot project, this must be prevented at all costs...
Some time ago I did https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/41431 change where tried to get a resource allocator V4 working for these AGESA boards, and despite a tiny size (less than 20 lines) - it almost worked, judging by that fam15h A88XM-E booted fine (although there might have been some other problems undercover). I wonder if it could help and will be happy to test the new changes related to this.
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 8:52 PM Arthur Heymans arthur@aheymans.xyz wrote:
We could announce this deprecation in the 4.16 release notes, then
deprecate after 4.18 (8.5 months from now). At that point, we'd create a branch and set up a verification builder so that any deprecated platforms could be continued in the 4.18 branch.
That timeline of 8.5 months does sound fair. I just found this updated
release schedule in the meeting minutes.
If we are going to release every 3 months then I guess that's a good way
to go.
I started a CL: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/59618 . I'll
update it to reflect that schedule if it can be agreed upon.
On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 6:07 PM Martin Roth gaumless@tutanota.com
wrote:
Hey Arthur,
Nov 24, 2021, 05:50 by arthur@aheymans.xyz:
Hi I would like to suggest to deprecate some legacy codepaths inside the
coreboot tree and therefore make some newer ones mandatory.
... snip ...> About the timeline of deprecations. Is deprecating non
conforming platforms from the master branch after the 4.16 release in 6 months a reasonable proposal?
I have no strong opinion about the platform deprecations, although I
suspect that PC Engines might be unhappy if it's platforms were removed from the ToT codebase.
My preference would be to announce deprecations in the release notes.
We just missed the 4.15 release, but we're switching to a 3 month release cadence, so the next release will be in early February, 2.5 months from now.
We could announce this deprecation in the 4.16 release notes, then
deprecate after 4.18 (8.5 months from now). At that point, we'd create a branch and set up a verification builder so that any deprecated platforms could be continued in the 4.18 branch.
Would this schedule work?
Martin
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-leave@coreboot.org
-- Best regards, Mike Banon Open Source Community Manager of 3mdeb - https://3mdeb.com/