[flashrom] Releasing 0.9.2 - board enables - request for Acks.

Michael Karcher flashrom at mkarcher.dialup.fu-berlin.de
Sun Feb 28 00:16:31 CET 2010

Am Freitag, den 26.02.2010, 11:34 +0100 schrieb Michael Karcher:

One release goal was to have pending patches committed. Especially with
the board enables, I am needing reviews to commit them, or we soften the
rules for board enable commits even further.

The tested/not tested state is about
http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/988/ which could use a review too. I
know it's already bitrotted (doesn't apply anymore) after I committed
the VL400 board enable.

> Abit IP35 Pro: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/843/
>  - Board enable works, but we have one report that the BIOS backflashes
> itself. No idea what happens.
No two BIOS chips on board.
flashrom/lspci/superiotool: http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/flashrom/2010-January/001837.html
Ack: received privately after flashing succeeded, before reboot.
Plan: Commit in "not tested" state, using the Ack received in private
mail. I can bounce the Ack mail to the list if you like.

> Abit VT6X4: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/955/ depending on
> http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/948/
>  - Board enable works: http://coreboot.pastebin.com/f6fd7daa3
> IMHO ready for commit. Review of the 948 appreciated.
Uwe wanted to take a look at 948
flashrom/lspci/superiotool: http://coreboot.pastebin.com/f5f25f1cf
Ack: no formal ACK. The user doesn't like to have real name / email
address in the flashrom log.
Plan: Commit in "tested" state. Ack by some developer needed per signoff
procedure. Waiting for Uwe's Ack on 948.

> HP Vectra VL420SFF: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/919/
>  - Board enable works, but DMI identifier was not tested. Confirmation
> for non-DMI is at http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/696/
flashrom/lspci/superiotool: http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/flashrom/2009-December/001440.html
Ack: pinged user again. Last ping request got only to the flashrom list,
forgot to Cc: the user.
Plan: Wait some days for an Ack, commit in "tested" state.

> Intel SE440BX-2: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/842/
>  - Board enable does not work. GPO register on PIIX4 is for strange
> reasons read-only, see
> http://www.flashrom.org/pipermail/flashrom/2010-February/002272.html
flashrom/lspci/superiotool: http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/flashrom/2010-January/001988.html
Ack: None, as the patch doesn't work.
Plan: Unsure, because "broken" is not an option, only tested/not tested.

> HP Vectra VL400: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/721/
>  - Board enable works, I was unsure about match quality. But
> http://pastebin.com/f6c509179 claims that both IDs I used for matching
> are really VL400 specific.
Already committed.

> Asus M2NBP-VM CSM: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/717/
>  - Board enable works, only confirmation was on IRC. No response on
> ping.
flashrom/lspci/superiotool: http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/flashrom/2009-December/001373.html
Ack: None, user unresponsive.
Plan: Commit in "tested" state. Ack by some developer needed per signoff

> MSI MS7207: http://patchwork.coreboot.org/patch/659/
>  - Untested. User got impatient and used another way of flashing - no
> response on ping.
flashrom/lspci/superiotool: http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/flashrom/2009-December/001301.html
Ack: None, user unresponsive
Plan: Commit in "not tested" state. Ack by some developer needed per
signoff procedure.

Thanks in advance for any reviews.

  Michael Karcher

More information about the flashrom mailing list