If its a SKL platform then I would prefer to get SKL fsp as those were tested configuration. I would also recommend you to reach out Intel customer facing team to let you out here.
Sent from my iPhone
On 18-May-2018, at 7:14 PM, Piotr Król piotr.krol@3mdeb.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 05/17/2018 06:20 PM, Banik, Subrata wrote:
Hi Subrata,
FSP2.0, I'm following Librem Purism options since they seem to boot the same SoC. They use KabyLake FSP obtained by get_blobss.sh [1], if you think this is incorrect then I would like to know why, because it may mean that Pursim code is also incorrect from Intel point of view.
SKL won't be compatible with KBL FSP. Please don’t try to use KBL FSP and mix match with SKL Coreboot. No one tested that combination.
You saw my boot log, so what coreboot platform would be good reference for my development? BTW last SKL FSP commit was almost 2 years ago.
@Youness, I would be glad to know what is Purims take on that. According to above message usage of KBL FSP is wrong approach for i7-6500. Maybe I'm reading/using get_blobs incorrectly?
Best Regards,
Piotr Król Embedded Systems Consultant https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE4DCbLYWmfoRjKeNLsu5x6WeqnkwFAlr+2MIACgkQsu5x6Weq nkyEDw//b22uIdIB1kOJ4PcskG5MENENbYs/yTSoGqd21Lz0smbjSi/SeYejngcX 8cScWDTDgrxmOLHcV2SJbheTI/tj1YX1Y00iScDADMk/s1PaJUMyPpcaP2oKXuga V+gXIJdtaH79K6H013PVb8s0DbU3BHcrO8gOZEAq+IsrTrXgoQ5HAk5XOEyAHtOc NdVLpg4bjjh6WqK/RXZlOXs3B7K3zkl6e9W0OPD98mH/qd7bX/DRA/zwSyqqx0g1 jZ0qkynsCXJHaWswOsUYyjAjizAFIdkCbDLYkWMqirveC+6ZtDKhqA3uLl4zqmRU KZxKf13HkVvBHa2V7kbVV87cBQ3/pI+NdTt1to/rvZQNv/dViqG8sK4mo5ymSTNZ 1QiNk9MtGnwiRSTSaXzq+4vSjyic4g9ezMjiLY78skAXTb9sevxjW95hYEKdS/MY P/4JjVsqn+Jp+YrIDIXShbC+cgjlCM5YWZ1rJQ3gw0/9qUJyRSa9kZfsKA3Qyv+j vt/v7G6yZTQdzMyYaZNoSB3lWsRwPa1Jmt5dcO13OsE9f3uP8ivLldtjCWnvVHKD ZnwyetKMJweS5FWdvx6Kc2I9bFBzMtYzeEDIEMSqqcNNHmY+n3OvWjoR2+dl+RjZ 9U9ZxuQro+29lyIx/jKKMQFV1lSH2XcostBCEKXyraxUH988Cqk= =Soqa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----