Re: [flashrom] [coreboot] Dualbios on GA-MA770-UD3

[Vadim Girlin]

On 07/20/2013 05:44 AM, Stefan Tauner wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Apr 2010 19:08:21 +0400
> vadimgirlin at gmail.com (Vadim Girlin) wrote:
> > On 04/09/2010 04:18 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> > > Hi Vadim,
> > >
> > > thanks for your mail. I have added the flashrom mailing list in CC:
> > > because we should develop a generic way to handle DualBIOS and similar
> > > techniques.
> > >
> > > On 09.04.2010 08:12, Vadim Girlin wrote:
> > > > I'm going to try coreboot on Gigabyte GA-MA770-UD3.
> > > > It's AMD 770 (RX780 / SB700).
> > > >
> > > > My motherboard supports hardware dual bios - with two chips on it.
> > > > I'm going to try flashing backup chip and boot from it. It seems to be
> > > > possible - I've tested it (flashing at least). Chips on this board could
> > > > be switched by changing bit 0 at undocumented register EF on LDN 7 of
> > > > IT8720. I can use slightly patched flashrom for accessing any chip I
> > > > want without any problems. And this is tested many times.
> > > >
> > > > My idea is to use backup chip for debugging - that always keeps my
> > > > chance to reboot from main bios chip. And removes the need for
> > > > desoldering etc.
> > > >
> > > > And second problem is that original bios is checking second chip - and
> > > > trying to recover it by flashing the bios from main chip on reboot?
> > > > rewriting coreboot. AFAICS this could be solved by including some
> > > > signatures etc. It seems to be easy to find out. May be someone is
> > > > working on this?
> > > >
> > > > BTW I can send the patch for flashrom - but I think that with
> > > > information I mentioned above somebody could make it much better than my
> > > > ugly hack. I hope the regs should be the same for all latest Gigabyte
> > > > MBs using IT8720/18
> > >
> > > It would be great if you could send that patch. It will help us make a
> > > flashrom design decision that works for all boards with multiple flash
> > > chips.
> >
> > OK, I'm sending the patch for flashrom - but it is based on RE and needs
> > careful testing.
> > It works fine on GA-MA770-UD3 (rev 1.0) but should be tested with other MBs.
> > Anyway I hope it should work for all latest Gigabyte MBs with dual bios
> > chips connected through IT8720/18.
> > I think it's not ready for inclusion in flashrom - it probably should be
> > done in more safe and generic way.
> > Probably it should check for default values in regs etc.
> >
> > It may be used as following:
> >
> > flashrom -p it87spi:gbdualindex=0 ...
> > flashrom -p it87spi:gbdualindex=1 ...
> >
> > This value needs to be set only once and further ops on selected chip
> > can be performed without parameters.
> > Index: it87spi.c
> >
> > --- it87spi.c	(revision 992)
> > +++ it87spi.c	(working copy)
> > @@ -155,6 +155,28 @@
> >    			sio_write(port, 0x65, (flashport & 0xff));
> >    			free(portpos);
> >    		}
> > 	portpos = extract_param(&programmer_param,
> > 				"gbdualindex=", ",:");
> > 	if (portpos) {
> > 		int chip_index = strtol(portpos, (char **)NULL, 0);
> > 		if ((chip_index!=0) && (chip_index!=1))	{
> > 			msg_perr("Dual bios: Invalid chip index requested: %d\n",chip_index);
> > 			flashport=0;
> > 		} else {
> > 			tmp=sio_read(port,0xEF);
> > 			msg_pinfo("Dual bios: Current chip : %d\n",tmp&1);
> > 			if (chip_index!=(tmp&1)) {
> > 				sio_write(port,0xEF,(tmp&0xFE)|chip_index);
> > 				tmp=sio_read(port,0xEF)&1;
> > 				if (tmp!=chip_index) {
> > 					msg_perr("Dual bios: Chip selection failed.\n");
> > 					flashport=0;
> > 				} else msg_pinfo("Dual bios: Selected chip: %d\n",tmp&1);
> > 			}
> > 		}
> > 		free(portpos);
> > 	}
> > }
> > exit_conf_mode_ite(port);
> > break;
>
> Hello Vadim!
>
> Someone has tested a refinement of your patch with an ITE 8728 and it
> (still) worked fine. I'd like to request a sign-off from you in case we
> want to eventually integrate it. (see
> http://www.coreboot.org/Development_Guidelines#Sign-off_Procedure for details).
> Thanks!

Hi Stefan!

Signed-off-by: Vadim Girlin

Is it sufficient to add it here or do I need to resend the patch with 
sign-off?

Vadim