[coreboot] Further coreboot releases, setting new standards

Nico Huber nico.h at gmx.de
Wed Nov 28 21:49:00 CET 2018

On 28.11.18 14:25, Arthur Heymans wrote:
> "Jay Talbott" <jaytalbott at sysproconsulting.com> writes:
>> I know I don't post much here, but I feel like I need to chime in on this
>> thread... Perhaps it's time that SysPro becomes a louder voice in the
>> community.
>> Bay Trail and Broadwell DE are both still very popular platforms, yet
>> neither one of them meets the cut for any of the three criteria. So I
>> caution against removing the support for either of them too hastily.
> I looked into that FSP 1.0 integration code a little. It would seem to
> me that relocatable ramstage and C_ENVIRONMENT_BOOTBLOCK are possible.
> NO_CAR_GLOBAL_MIGRATION however seems rather impossible as the FSP has
> total control over the environment and destroys the CAR environment
> itself. Since I propose the standards I could offer some help to reach
> them.
> It looks like FSP 1.0 will be dragging coreboot down for some time.

One way to mitigate would be to port the x86emu to CAR stages. Then just
do what we always did with incompatible binaries, cage them. Would be a
nice exercise for those that think FSP 1.0 needs to be maintained up-

> Maybe we can agree not to integrate such monsters into coreboot in the
> future?  BTW baytrail has a non FSP port that will likely be in better
> shape.

Yes please.


More information about the coreboot mailing list