Hi Aaron, You may want to check the QEMU-q35 target as well:
Automatic boot test returned (PASS/FAIL/TOTAL): 2/2/4 Emulation targets: "QEMU x86 q35/ich9" using payload TianoCore : FAIL : https://lava.9esec.io/r/3427 "QEMU x86 q35/ich9" using payload SeaBIOS : FAIL : https://lava.9esec.io/r/3426 "QEMU x86 i440fx/piix4" using payload SeaBIOS : SUCCESS : https://lava.9esec.io/r/3425 "QEMU AArch64" using payload LinuxBoot_u-root_kexec : SUCCESS : https://lava.9esec.io/r/3424 Thanks Keith On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 5:47 PM Aaron Durbin <adur...@google.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 2:46 PM Mike Banon <mikeb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Unfortunately it seems a lot of boards are affected by this. A88XM-E >> and Lenovo G505S (AMD fam15h) also got broken: they rarely succeed at >> booting - and, when they do, no boot devices are available (virtual >> floppies too, for some reason) - except coreinfo/tint secondary >> payloads which became prone to freezing. I attach the A88XM-E logs >> I've been able to obtain with USB FT232H: >> >> 1) ok_e6fb1344ed9188e19be4b54bdf1a76680b8c4523.txt - last coreboot >> repo's revision where all the stuff works >> 2) fail_1_3b02006afe8a85477dafa1bd149f1f0dba02afc7.txt - this commit >> got the boards broken for the first time >> 3) fail_2_6b95507ec5b087658178a325bdc68570bc48bb20.txt - this is a log >> for coreboot's master top >> >> For some reason logs for 2) and 3) always stop after "PCI: 00:12.2 >> EHCI Debug Port hook triggered". >> >> I hope these commits could be reverted before we figure out what's >> going on with them. Good thing we've noticed it fast enough. >> > > Thanks, Mike. The amd chipset code (all of it from what I can tell) is > fundamentally broken and at odds with all of the resource allocation flow. > They worked previously because dynamic resources were being assigned using an > algorithm that just assumed there weren't collisions, and that was done w/o > all the necessary info required for making the proper decisions regarding > dynamic resource allocation. > > I landed the other chipsets' fixes, but the amd chipset code is going to take > a lot more to fix. Would you be willing to test patches as they are crafted? > Given the largeness of the problem as well as the gnarly code that is the amd > chipset code it's going to take some time so I think we do need to revert the > allocator changes until we can do some house keeping. > > -Aaron >> >> Best regards, >> Mike Banon >> >> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 8:47 PM Keith Hui <buu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi guys, >> > >> > 31ab7de51a is CB:41368, cherry picked into my local repo. >> > >> > Turns out I have to back out all four of Furquan's patches >> > (CB:39486~39489) for my board to boot normally again. >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > I'll now get a log with everything in at SPEW. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 1:05 PM Aaron Durbin <adur...@google.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > Keith, is it possible to have the console log level set to SPEW? I'm not >> > > seeing the full logs to piece it all together. >> > > >> > > Allocating resources... >> > > Reading resources... >> > > Setting RAM size to 768 MB >> > > PNP: 03f0.8 missing read_resources >> > > Done reading resources. >> > > Resource allocator: DOMAIN: 0000 - Pass 1 (gathering requirements) >> > > Resource allocator: DOMAIN: 0000 - Pass 2 (allocating resources) >> > > Resource ranges: >> > > Base: 1000, Size: d000, Tag: 100 >> > > Base: f000, Size: 1000, Tag: 100 >> > > Resource ranges: >> > > Base: 0, Size: ff800000, Tag: 200 >> > > Base: 100000000, Size: f00000000, Tag: 100200 >> > > Resource ranges: >> > > Base: 10000000, Size: 8000000, Tag: 1200 >> > > Resource ranges: >> > > Base: 18000000, Size: 1100000, Tag: 200 >> > > >> > > This is the memory address space: >> > > Base: 0, Size: ff800000, Tag: 200 >> > > Base: 100000000, Size: f00000000, Tag: 100200 >> > > >> > > Those are valid ranges to choose dynamic resources from. >> > > >> > > PCI: 00:00.0 10 <- [0x0000000000 - 0x000fffffff] size 0x10000000 gran >> > > 0x1c prefmem >> > > >> > > I see 'Setting RAM size to 768 MB' which means I would expect to see a >> > > hole in the ranges representing 768MiB. >> > > >> > > that would be bad. I don't know what commit '31ab7de51a' is, but it >> > > might not contain the CB:41368. Having SPEW logs would be helpful. >> > > >> > > Also, what mainboard Kconfig are you selecting for p3bf? >> > > src/mainboard/asus/p2b ? >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 10:42 AM Keith Hui <buu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> (Temporarily leaving the list out) >> > >> >> > >> Hi Aaron, >> > >> >> > >> Here is a log with everything including CB:41368 included. I'll get >> > >> this log out to you first, while I try a build with all problem >> > >> commits left out. >> > >> >> > >> Thanks >> > >> Keith >> > >> >> > >> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 12:53 AM Aaron Durbin <adur...@google.com> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:51 PM Keith Hui <buu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >> Hi guys, >> > >> >> >> > >> >> I tested these fixes on my board, and I have to say there's still >> > >> >> something wrong. They did address the hang or reset in SeaBIOS I >> > >> >> first >> > >> >> described, but now either my ATA hard drive failed to boot (it tried >> > >> >> to hand off to GRUB on my drive, but didn't get there), or it can't >> > >> >> find the option ROM of my video card, meaning no display. >> > >> >> >> > >> >> Now I want to try the other way, testing a build with all changes >> > >> >> related to the problem backed out instead. So besides the one I first >> > >> >> identified, what other related patches should I try backing out? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Just go to the parent of the identified patch. As for the other >> > >> > symptoms you are seeing, I'd love to see logs with the patches we >> > >> > identified so we can root cause. >> > >> > >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > >> > >> > -Aaron >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> >> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:54 PM Furquan Shaikh >> > >> >> <furquan.m.sha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > Similar fix for i440x: >> > >> >> > https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/41368 >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:29 AM Aaron Durbin <adur...@google.com> >> > >> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > i440x chipset is doing things in the wrong way like sandybridge. >> > >> >> > > I uploaded this fix for sandy: >> > >> >> > > https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/41364 We'll need to do >> > >> >> > > the equivalent for i440x. >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:13 AM Aaron Durbin >> > >> >> > > <adur...@google.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> OK. I'll take a look at your logs and see what's going on. The >> > >> >> > >> patch link I sent was based off of someone else's mainboard >> > >> >> > >> logs. >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:59 AM Keith Hui <buu...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > >> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >>> Hi Aaron, >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >>> It didn't help. There still a way out of whack entry in the >> > >> >> > >>> coreboot >> > >> >> > >>> table and e820 entry ending at 000003ffffffffff, which I think >> > >> >> > >>> have >> > >> >> > >>> more to do than the 41363's scope. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >>> Keith >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >>> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:24 PM Aaron Durbin >> > >> >> > >>> <adur...@google.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> > >> > >> >> > >>> > I think the following patch will fix things up: >> > >> >> > >>> > https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/41363 Please let me >> > >> >> > >>> > know. >> > >> >> > >>> > >> > >> >> > >>> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 8:43 AM Keith Hui <buu...@gmail.com> >> > >> >> > >>> > wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> Thanks Furquan. >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> Here are 3 logs. Log 1 is at the commit just before the >> > >> >> > >>> >> problem. Log 2 >> > >> >> > >>> >> is at the problem commit. Log 3 is at the current master, >> > >> >> > >>> >> if that's >> > >> >> > >>> >> what you meant by ToT. >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> I'm using SeaBIOS 1.13.0, compiled once using the attached >> > >> >> > >>> >> .config >> > >> >> > >>> >> before taking these logs. All 3 runs are taken using the >> > >> >> > >>> >> same SeaBIOS >> > >> >> > >>> >> binary. >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> Then I recompiled SeaBIOS with CONFIG_RELOCATE_INIT off, >> > >> >> > >>> >> replaced the >> > >> >> > >>> >> payload used in run 3, and took an extra run. In this case >> > >> >> > >>> >> the board >> > >> >> > >>> >> reset on its own at "Scanning option roms", looping >> > >> >> > >>> >> infinitely. >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> Hope this helps >> > >> >> > >>> >> Keith >> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 7:38 AM Furquan Shaikh >> > >> >> > >>> >> <furquan.m.sha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > Thanks for the report Keith! >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 3:42 AM Paul Menzel >> > >> >> > >>> >> > <pmen...@molgen.mpg.de> wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > Dear Keith, >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > Am 13.05.20 um 05:21 schrieb Keith Hui: >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > I am still refining the P2B family of boards, now >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > including the >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > infamous P3B-F with an unusual appetite for hacks to >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > make work. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > That said, I'm now finding that, on P3B-F, SeaBIOS >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > hangs when it tries >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > to relocate itself as part of its usual chores. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > Having just learned >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > git bisect, I decided to try it out. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > It was commit >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > 3b02006afe8a85477dafa1bd149f1f0dba02afc7 [1] that >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > broke >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > my SeaBIOS. It doesn't affect my newer toy the >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > P8Z77-M as much as >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > P3B-F, but I still want to blame that, and probably >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > the very next >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > commit as well, as they both deal with some very >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > modern aspects of PCI >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > that well predates the 440BX. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > Is there anything we can do to fix 3b02006afe? >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > I commented in the change-set [1] to make the author >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > and reviewers aware >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > of this issue and referenced your list message, and ask >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > to comment here. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > Could you please provide the debug log of coreboot and >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > SeaBIOS? >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > As Paul mentioned, can you please provide the debug logs >> > >> >> > >>> >> > for coreboot >> > >> >> > >>> >> > and SeaBIOS both with ToT coreboot and with HEAD set >> > >> >> > >>> >> > before the change >> > >> >> > >>> >> > 3b02006afe where it does not hang? Thanks! >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > Meanwhile I ported the P3B-F board enable to flashrom >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > [2], which got a >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > heavy workout during this bisect, through vendor >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > firmware and both >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > good and bad builds of coreboot. In all cases I can >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > flash internal, no >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > longer having to haul out my P2B-LS just to use it as >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > a flasher. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > Enjoy this long overdue board enable. If it gets >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > submitted, I'll >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > retract the ramstage hack[3] doing the same as >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > redundant. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > Very nice! It’s always amazing, how after so many >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > years, when the vendor >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > already stopped supporting the device, the community >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > still supports the >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > device and improves the firmware showing that Free >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > Software is the more >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > sustainable way. >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > Kind regards, >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > Paul >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > [1] https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/39486 >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > [2] https://review.coreboot.org/c/flashrom/+/41354 >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > > [3] https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/41224 >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > To unsubscribe send an email to >> > >> >> > >>> >> > > coreboot-le...@coreboot.org >> > >> >> > >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> >> > >>> >> coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org >> > >> >> > >>> >> To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org >> > _______________________________________________ >> > coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org >> > To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org _______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
