On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 07:14:47PM -0700, David Hendricks wrote:
Which wiki? For commit rights, have you tried https://www.coreboot.org/Git# Register_with_gerrit ? I just updated the board status wiki to hopefully make that step easier to follow.
Ah, I was looking all over "Developer Guide", "Getting Started" type things and somehow did't see the Git page :)
Having a pointer in the Board Status description straight to the Git page is definetly better though.
Please let us know where you get stuck. Many of us set up our accounts years ago and the documentation may be stale or non-obvious to newcomers, so a fresh perspective is welcome.
I just didn't realise all that was needed is a gerrit account, I though the board status would be some seperate repo where you can push directly without review.
Anyways, I figured it out now and uploadded the status report.
--Daniel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Hi Daniel
On 07/04/18 14:13, Daniel Gröber wrote:
Anyways, I figured it out now and uploadded the status report.
--Daniel
Thanks :)
Can you also do this on a periodic basis?
If you've got a D16 to submit reports on, that'd also be great.
- -- Leah Rowe
Libreboot developer and project founder.
Use free software. Free as in freedom. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Use a free BIOS - https://libreboot.org/ Use a free operating system, GNU+Linux.
Support computer user freedom https://sfconservancy.org/ https://fsf.org/ - https://gnu.org/
Minifree Ltd, trading as Ministry of Freedom | Registered in England, No. 9361826 | VAT No. GB202190462 Registered Office: 19 Hilton Road, Canvey Island, Essex SS8 9QA, UK | Web: https://minifree.org/
On Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 02:25:19PM +0100, Leah Rowe wrote:
If you've got a D16 to submit reports on, that'd also be great.
I just pushed one on the D16.
Thanks, Ward.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 07/04/18 16:03, Ward Vandewege wrote:
On Sat, Apr 07, 2018 at 02:25:19PM +0100, Leah Rowe wrote:
If you've got a D16 to submit reports on, that'd also be great.
I just pushed one on the D16.
Thanks, Ward.
thanks! :)
- -- Leah Rowe
Libreboot developer and project founder.
Use free software. Free as in freedom. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
Use a free BIOS - https://libreboot.org/ Use a free operating system, GNU+Linux.
Support computer user freedom https://sfconservancy.org/ https://fsf.org/ - https://gnu.org/
Minifree Ltd, trading as Ministry of Freedom | Registered in England, No. 9361826 | VAT No. GB202190462 Registered Office: 19 Hilton Road, Canvey Island, Essex SS8 9QA, UK | Web: https://minifree.org/
Thanks for everyone who has submitted status reports and now proved that they work.
BTW the boards devices support ASPM so you can remove the pcie_aspm=off in your kernel command line - I like to force it on myself with pcie_aspm=force.
On 04/06/2018 09:54 PM, David Hendricks wrote:
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 3:40 PM, Taiidan@gmx.com Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
Like I have said before these types of policies are eventually going to result in coreboot only having unobtainable development boards in the tree (that are of course not owner controlled)
It simply isn't right.
Indeed, this isn't right (as in correct) so don't spread this FUD. The boards are still in the tree, you just need to check out whatever coreboot version is known to actually work with the board. For example if a board was last reported working in coreboot-4.6, then `git checkout 4.6` or checkout a specific hash reported on the board_status repo.
I swear I heard "removed from the tree" somewhere - irregardless only unobtainable closed-source development boards will benefit from new coreboot features.
Eventually the old versions of coreboot will become non-functional for whatever reason so it won't be that simple (ie: don't checkout master) if one doesn't require the new features - already for example there are various old libs that coreboot requires which are only available *unsigned* from a single site.
It does no good for users to have hundreds of boards in master that fail to boot, and no good for developers who need to maintain and refactor code for boards that nobody tests and have been abandoned.
I am not complaining because some random boards from 2005 that no one uses are being removed - this is because the last owner controlled x86_64 boards will eventually be functionally removed (and would have been if no one had submitted status for the D8).
This isn't hundreds of boards that fail to boot - it is a few boards that do boot - and people know that they do (as everyone can see now that status have been submitted :D)
As an example I don't mind the removal of the H8SCM because AGESA doesn't support IOMMU and the boards are now quite expensive (and not worth it for the money).
There's obviously a few people on this list using the Asus boards mentioned which is great. The issue we need to solve is getting more people to submit test results so that this isn't a problem in the future.
Even if I didn't use mine for something important I am unable to submit results because I refuse to provide my "real" name and am too honest to use a fake name.
There's obviously a few people on this list using the Asus boards mentioned which is great. The issue we need to solve is getting more people to submit test results so that this isn't a problem in the future.
Even if I didn't use mine for something important I am unable to submit results because I refuse to provide my "real" name and am too honest to use a fake name.
As I understand the DCO is only required for code submissions, while board_status results are auto-generated and don't require a sign-off. Not sure how Patrick and others feel about allowing aliases to be used for gerrit accounts though.
-
Daniel Gröber -
David Hendricks -
Leah Rowe -
Taiidan＠gmx.com -
Ward Vandewege