[coreboot] New board with unsupported cpu, chipset, and superIO

Patrick Georgi patrick at georgi-clan.de
Fri Aug 29 07:39:20 CEST 2014

Am 2014-08-28 23:38, schrieb Todd Weaver:
> Comparing the blob-free versions from Intel (which are apparently
> signed, so according to http://www.coreboot.org/Binary_situation are
> at a 9000+ panic level), would it be possible to have blob-free
> (probably through RE) that would work (meaning does not require signed
> binaries) on an AMD board?
Newer chipsets (as in yet to be released) come with signed parts, but it 
seems the scope of the signature is configurable somehow by AMD. There 
were some mails about that a couple of days ago ("AMD PSP").

> We will do what we can here. The issue is even with immense leverage,
> having the source released (from AMI, or AMD, (or Intel for that
> matter)) would undermine tremendous profit that these companies make
> by keeping this proprietary.
AMD claims that they stopped working on open sourcing their 
initialization code because it's lots of work (ie. money) with limited 
return on investment. How much work that is isn't here or there (most of 
that is because their internal development process is less than optimal 
and, like most processes in most organizations, hard to change).
But it means that someone could make it worth their while given the 
right kind of project.

What they don't provide sources for is CPU microcode updates (no one 
does since it's of limited value without the microcode development 
toolchain and the microcode itself that is getting updated) and various 
smaller firmware (USB3 which is a licensed core, IMC, an embedded 
controller, and the SMU).
For IMC and SMU there's some reverse engineering effort, partially 
documented in the wiki, so by asking the right questions to the right 
people in this community, plus some development, it might be possible to 
get them opened up even without AMD's help.


More information about the coreboot mailing list