thanks again,
Now i have tested it with the new FILO together with coreboot and payloadlib, but get the same result. I can see that coreboot writing the table with the signature (LBIO) on address: 0x00000500, but FILO can't find this signature when it search the address range.
what should i do? how can i debugg this? I print out the whole memory during the FILO search and can not see any LBIO signature.
regards,
/Masoud
-----Original Message----- From: Stefan Reinauer stefan.reinauer@coresystems.de To: Masoud Fatollahy masoudf@t2data.se Cc: "coreboot@coreboot.org" coreboot@coreboot.org Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:06:06 +0200 Subject: Re: [coreboot] Coreboot and stand alone filo
On 18.08.2010, at 15:55, "Masoud Fatollahy" masoudf@t2data.se wrote:
thanks for the response,
I have downloaded the latest version of filo from Subversion with $ svn co svn://coreboot.org/filo/trunk/filo
but this version requires the payloadlib of coreboot, it is what i don't want to use
Why?
, is there any other version which doesn't requir coreboot/payload/payloadlib?
Yes but you will have to fix it yourself, as I wrote in the other mail..
mv.h
/Masoud -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Reinauer stefan.reinauer@coresystems.de To: coreboot@coreboot.org, masoudf@t2data.se Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 13:06:36 +0200 Subject: Re: [coreboot] Coreboot and stand alone filo
On 8/17/10 10:05 PM, Masoud Fatollahy wrote: Hi,
I am trying to make coreboot v4 works with a old version of filo(stand alone).
I build the coreboot and definde a paload which has been build with an old filo which is not using payloadlib of the coreboot. when filo try to read the linuxbios table , but it can not find the signaturr LBIO. and it hangs.
Do i have to use filo and payloadlib of the coreboot, or is it a way to fix this problem. we don't want to have any depency between coreboot and filo.
thanks,
/Masoud
Hi Masoud,
The coreboot table parser in older FILOs does not support the "FORWARD" tag
http://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/browser/trunk/payloads/libpayload/...
I'd suggest that you use newer versions of FILO. However, implementing support for that tag in older versions should be rather straight forward, so you can give that a try, too..
Stefan