[coreboot] Problems changing payload on Intel Leaf Hill

Melissa Yi huayi at celestica.com
Wed Oct 11 03:35:21 CEST 2017


Hi Tahnia,
     Have you tried 32-bit UEFI payload? I met  this problem in Denverton
platfrom too with 64-bitUEFI payload.

Thanks.

Regards,
Melissa Yi

BIOS Lead Engineer
Celestica(Shanghai) R&D Center, China

www.celestica.com
Solid Partners, Flexible Solutions

2017-10-10 16:29 GMT+08:00 Tahnia Lichtenstein <unlich at gmail.com>:

> Hi,
>
> I am trying to build coreboot for the Intel Apollo Lake-I reference board
> (Oxbow Hill, similar to Leaf Hill).
>
> Intel has provided an implementation for this reference board based on an
> outdated coreboot version.
>
> Along with the coreboot implementation, they provided a compatible
> pre-compiled UEFI payload (with no source, but run-time boot menu looks
> like Tianocore's) and a compatible pre-compiled U-Boot payload (with links
> to U-Boot source on Github along with patch so as to reproduce the
> pre-compiled binary). The pre-compiled binaries have associated .config
> files for coreboot integration. When building coreboot with either of the
> precompiled binaries, and stitching the coreboot output binaries together
> with Intel-provided blobs (using Intel provided FIT application) to produce
> the final firmware image, the firmware works as expected.
>
> Then I built this version of coreboot with a self-compiled payload, such
> as Tianocore UDK2017 CorebootPayloadPkg or SeaBIOS, using the .confg files
> provided by Intel for UEFI payloads or legacy payloads respectively (just
> modified for specific payload type and path, and disabling verified and
> measured boot). I stitched the coreboot output with the Intel-provided
> blobs using the exact same method as before. Then, in run-time, coreboot
> transitions to the payload and nothing happens from then on (i.e. no
> further serial debug messages, no change to display monitor).
>
> I also built U-Boot from github, applying Intel's patch to match Intel's
> precompiled binary, and this self-compiled binary works in run-time (well,
> sort of, there are a couple of problems but point is the payload runs). A
> notable build difference is that this build uses the .config file provided
> by Intel as is, and that the payload that was built is the binary
> equivalent of the Intel pre-compiled binary.
>
> Am I not specifying the correct configuration options for Tianocore and
> SeaBIOS? I.e. is there more to it than just selecting the payload type and
> specifying the payload path? Do I need to configure or update memory
> addresses or ranges to match payload sizes, or some such? Do I need to make
> specific changes to the payloads' source code to support the platform? Any
> advice on how/where to start debugging?
>
> (Serial debug logs and .config files attached.)
>
> Best regards,
> Tahnia
>
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20171011/d4e506b9/attachment.html>


More information about the coreboot mailing list