G505S has KB9012 chip on board, I can guarantee this. However, maybe KB9012 is a bit similar to the older chips, and just the internal 128KB memory and some features got added. If you'd look at KB9012 dataset available online, I think it had a comparison table of KB9012 vs some older chip. Hope this helps!
пт, 8 апр. 2022 г., 16:46 Abel Briggs <[email protected]>: > Yes, I was looking at the G505S and its EC when considering these patches. > > The situation with the EC in the G505S seems a bit odd. The EC is named > `ene932`, but there are several commits in the codebase which reference the > chip as a KB9012. The KB9012 datasheet, however, reference the ENE930 > series chips as the predecessor chip to the KB9010 series. > > The S230U has a KB9012 and the Compal firmware seems to have a similar > `OperationRegion` layout to the firmware in the `ene932`, but the EC query > values are completely different. The S230U basically defines its own EC in > its mainboard tree and only uses the `ene932` code for its helper I/O space > functions. > > If anyone has a G505S or its vendor documentation to check that the chip > on the board is really an ENE930 series, I think that would help clear this > up. > > This is something I was considering trying to refactor as well, by giving > the S230U its own `ec/` common code. However, I would probably throw that > patch in with my mainboard's patchset (Lenovo Edge E530), since otherwise > the S230U would be the only user of that code. > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Ivan Ivanov <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, April 8, 2022, 4:38 AM > *To:* Abel Briggs <[email protected]> > *Cc:* [email protected] <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [coreboot] Refactoring duplicate Embedded Controller code > > If this could help you, coreboot-supported Lenovo G505S also has EC KB9012 > > чт, 7 апр. 2022 г. в 06:44, Abel Briggs <[email protected]>: > > > > Hello, > > > > I was looking at the code and ACPI for a number of different embedded > > controllers while adding support for a Lenovo mainboard. > > The mainboard in question has an EC nearly identical to the Twist S230U > > (Compal KB9012), so I planned to factor out the S230U's EC code/ACPI > > into its own chip. > > > > While doing this, I noticed there were several duplicate functions > > across the `ec/` directory, so I'd like to potentially submit some > > patches to clean them up. However, I'm not sure of the best way to > > go about this. > > > > The following is what I currently have in mind: > > > > - Removing most individual `ec_write_cmd()` > > and similar functions andreplacing calls with their respective > `ec/acpi/ec.c` library functions > > - Removing individual `kbc_` polling functions and sharing the ones > defined > > in `drivers/pc80/keyboard.c` > > - Should public library functions for sending and receiving data from > > a PC80 keyboard controller be defined in the PC80 driver and exported > > in `include/pc80/keyboard.h`? > > - We already have `send_keyboard()` there, > > which sends a command and receives data - would it be good to add > > individual functions for those operations as well? > > > > Any suggestions or recommendations would be appreciated. I looked for > > guidelines on suggested code organization in the docs/commit history/ > > mailing list, but came up mostly empty-handed. > > > > Thanks! > > > > _______________________________________________ > > coreboot mailing list -- [email protected] > > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > >
_______________________________________________ coreboot mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
