[coreboot] Coreboot on the Supermicro H8SCM-F

[PeerCorps Trust Fund]

This information is very much appreciated.

These boards are actually quite nice and can support up to 128 Gb of RAM. Having a Micro-ATX option in what is supported by coreboot is also nice. The CPUs can be found on ebay for as little as $5.

M

On 04/26/2017 10:04 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 04/26/2017 01:59 PM, Taiidan at gmx.com wrote:
>> On 04/26/2017 02:47 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 04/26/2017 01:43 PM, Taiidan at gmx.com wrote:
>>>> On 04/26/2017 06:00 AM, PeerCorps Trust Fund wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Greetings All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I recently came across the following listing concerning Coreboot on
>>>>> the Supermicro H8SCM-F.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.coreboot.org/Board:supermicro/h8scm
>>>>>
>>>>> You will note that the last update was in January of 2014. I also
>>>>> noticed a note in the page concerning "OS Booting - Proprietary BIOS".
>>>>> Is there anyone who can elaborate as to what this means?
>>>>>
>>>> I don't know, but there isn't any status update so it probably doesn't
>>>> work and that port uses AGESA so you won't get IOMMU.
>>>>
>>>> I am working on porting the H8SCM and H8SCM-F (same thing really) to the
>>>> native code base, it is a nice affordable opteron board that you can get
>>>> used for $30.
>>> Would be interested to know if you can disable the proprietary BMC?  For
>>> many coreboot use cases this would be necessary.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>> I have the version without that feature (not the -F) so I am not 100%
>> sure, but the vendor BIOS for mine is the -F bios and it boots fine - of
>> course you never really know for sure if it is "disabled" but I imagine
>> it functions the same as the asus boards where no ROM equals no BMC. I
>> will ask supermicro about this.
>> The difference between the -F and the regular version is the lack of the
>> BMC RTL NIC and the socket for the ROM chip.
>>
>> The other security concern is a RMII link from the BMC chip to one of
>> the intel nics, which I assume is present on both models.
>
> Thanks for the pointer on the non-F variant -- from what I can tell the
> BMC's RAM is physically removed which makes an exploit from the BMC side
> of the network virtually impossible.
>
> If you can get this up and running it would make a great
> owner-controlled low-end machine.  Nice find!
>
> - --
> 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/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJZAO8jAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFbih8IAKn7zhi8GQ0iaYxLeMbvLLbL
> 0yae1M48xnOQb+y7w1UR/5doYFqMStoW6lNuu21/b00xcqGmZOR1obZGVT+jZeX9
> H+oTaq5qKQ7XhU1HoCH70aGlUvtf8gkyO6PSrgfj+Ma8JHxzwqeiiuYiejwwSUxt
> LsCcJl5oF98tc4GHL9j90CuPxEnmHRcSfxNmGjOjyxc3hkyX0AcvISPN8Ki1YkXw
> TA8N+vTCaNCot6/rXRGwhmxmych4n+oF7MAocEIiVoTJ9gAVgKx87hGBzaab7gOD
> 3s+iEpikZWlsj9lNH5RuBthrT9oQ42f3gSLahyS+0eJMwjXN/E3UQ+wetbBvbRg=
> =YaNR
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>