Re: [coreboot] Owner-controlled POWER9 Talos II [was: Disabling Intel ME 11 via undocumented mode]
On 09/06/2017 01:05 PM, Rene Shuster wrote:
Thanks for sharing this info.
So the 4x SATA ports are optional and powered by PM8069, and they will only be present if you checkbox the "Integrated Microsemi SAS Controller (Proprietary)" on the purchase page, correct? Or in other words: if you don't checkbox "Integrated Microsemi SAS Controller (Proprietary)" you will receive a board with no SATA ports?
Correct. Given the advantages of NVMe especially for a high-power development system like the Talos™ II this was considered an acceptable tradeoff.
How is the Samsung NVMe drive physically connected (M.2/U.2 or PCIe slot)? What model# is it?
PCIe. We'll be selecting an active model closer to machine ship; Samsung part numbers can change over time so we don't necessarily want to commit to a given part # at this point.
So BCM it is. They have a pretty thorough Diagnostic for their NICs. I'm using it on some of our servers when it's time to run diagnostics. It's DOS based (but they have an UEFI version as well) and it does check quite a few things ("Register Tests, Memory Tests, Miscellaneous Tests, Data Tests, Cable Tests, APE Register Tests and APE Diagnostics Tests"). For the BCM5719 the diag is located here: https://docs.broadcom.com/docs-and-downloads/docs/eula_download/570x/B57udia... It includes the B57Diag.pdf which might be of interest for anyone who wants to reverse engineer the fw.
Sounds good. This is the only device on the board that requires firmware, but it is behind the IOMMU and the FSF has indicated that we can still obtain RYF with this limitation.
That being said, we'd love to see a libre firmware created for this controller as it would allow not only this system, but future systems, to be blob-free while using a modern non-Intel GbE NIC...
Will TALOS 2 support PCI-e expansion systems such as the ones from Cyclone Microsystems? http://cyclone.com
On 09/06/2017 02:04 PM, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
Will TALOS 2 support PCI-e expansion systems such as the ones from Cyclone Microsystems? http://cyclone.com
As long as any drivers (if required) are open source, then absolutely.
From what I understand, no drivers are needed at all since the expansion
is handled at the hardware level, so you should be able to just "plug and play".
Hope this helps!
I am curious as to how Raptor got the funding for TALOS this time around, have major corporations finally seen the light and ordered some :D?
I also want to know as to what is wrong with Intel's NICs so that I can share it with others (and not buy them in the future) - is it just simply the fact that they are an anti-computing-freedom company? or is there a sneaky backdoor?
I am so incredibly happy that we at long last have an off the shelf ultra high performance secure and owner controlled product, raptor has done what many other companies said wasn't possible AND made it reasonably priced for the level of juice you get - serious kudos to everyone involved in bringing talos to life <3
Also want to add why broadcom? I heard they didn't have a good attitude to open source and as a large company I imagine they have a lot of institutional inertia preventing that from changing? - why not one of the smaller NIC makers such as atheros, mellanox, solarflare etc?
Thank you for the future infos!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/08/2017 10:38 PM, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
Also want to add why broadcom? I heard they didn't have a good attitude to open source and as a large company I imagine they have a lot of institutional inertia preventing that from changing? - why not one of the smaller NIC makers such as atheros, mellanox, solarflare etc?
Cost was the main driver for this design. Our focus was on getting the product to market at a reasonable price point, and Broadcom's NetXtreme series already has excellent Linux driver support, meaning that we didn't need to invest additional resources into driver development. Depending on what the uptake of Talos II is (and therefore how much "nice to have" development we can justify vs. simply keeping a functional, RYF-certifiable product on the market) we may consider changes to the NIC supplier in the future.
As to why not Intel, in addition to the obvious issues in relation to sourcing a critical system component from a direct competitor, we have experienced issues with Intel GbE NICs in the past under Linux related to the on-chip firmware locking up and requiring a host reboot. The NetXtreme devices appear to be quite stable, and their internal operation has already been partially documented, meaning development of a true open firmware port is at least possible. The same cannot be said for the other players in this space.
- -- Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com
600-page documentation about the BCM5718 Family: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site:broadcom.com+5718+programmer%27s+reference+gu...
Quote: "This document covers the BCM5718 family of NetXtreme / NetLink Ethernet controllers. This family of controllers includes the following devices: • BCM5717 • BCM5718 • BCM5719 • BCM5720 The document focuses on the registers, control blocks, and software interfaces necessary for host software programming."
Look like fantastic documentation. Is there no such thing as the EFF starting a fundraiser/crowdfunding campaign, then hiring appropriate firmware engineers and coming with with an open-source fw? In a perfect world yes.
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Timothy Pearson < tpearson@raptorengineering.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 09/08/2017 10:38 PM, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
Also want to add why broadcom? I heard they didn't have a good attitude to open source and as a large company I imagine they have a lot of institutional inertia preventing that from changing? - why not one of the smaller NIC makers such as atheros, mellanox, solarflare etc?
Cost was the main driver for this design. Our focus was on getting the product to market at a reasonable price point, and Broadcom's NetXtreme series already has excellent Linux driver support, meaning that we didn't need to invest additional resources into driver development. Depending on what the uptake of Talos II is (and therefore how much "nice to have" development we can justify vs. simply keeping a functional, RYF-certifiable product on the market) we may consider changes to the NIC supplier in the future.
As to why not Intel, in addition to the obvious issues in relation to sourcing a critical system component from a direct competitor, we have experienced issues with Intel GbE NICs in the past under Linux related to the on-chip firmware locking up and requiring a host reboot. The NetXtreme devices appear to be quite stable, and their internal operation has already been partially documented, meaning development of a true open firmware port is at least possible. The same cannot be said for the other players in this space.
Timothy Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJZtrouAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFbyGQH/37BUzE1M/P2Cc1nx9CkKTB1 gQ8ClVGdiXcCfNIMOx6HqVRdAp6acVf+xUvDkbVY0lES9cJUJx6amJcOnedI3ohm QRMHylIwBUELJRtUV38kUsna7F0QHYrH/bOuoY/iFqvfbiF96i6jGBDCFzzC7ZmA zxOkNrfi0bE6ux7r+66JzfLslN4ysvWDIAnYxvZ1CpJGkVRUjBuUFOGsC6vnxFYY 8/k1HwmMiYsn7t3lDfkHpqmfLcTq/cnm/oyzQR6UGZEf/z4a17hRH6J2A1dI1b1l eePl6xkDXy1rFKUOZItridY1wrIHpNgE2EXgxLxRV7PnqKyP9ccEdv3LJ8w2ikE= =73Bg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, 8 Sep 2017 23:17:19 -0400 "Taiidan@gmx.com" Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
I am curious as to how Raptor got the funding for TALOS this time around, have major corporations finally seen the light and ordered some :D?
Here's some information on it: https://www.raptorcs.com/blog/08212017001.php See question " How did you bring the Talos™ product line to a more affordable price point? "
Regards, Merlin
I also want to know as to what is wrong with Intel's NICs so that I can share it with others (and not buy them in the future) - is it just simply the fact that they are an anti-computing-freedom company? or is there a sneaky backdoor?
I am so incredibly happy that we at long last have an off the shelf ultra high performance secure and owner controlled product, raptor has done what many other companies said wasn't possible AND made it reasonably priced for the level of juice you get - serious kudos to everyone involved in bringing talos to life <3
-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
-
Merlin Büge -
Rene Shuster -
Taiidan＠gmx.com -
Timothy Pearson