Thanks for the clarification. The issue I was referring to is AVR-54 in that same spec update. "System May Experience Inability to Boot or May Cease Operation” I didn’t see a way a BIOS update could resolve that issue! But I’m really glad to read that my box doesn’t use the LPC bus at all. That does immunize it from AVR-54. ;-)
Richard > On Mar 21, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Jim Thompson <j...@netgate.com> wrote: > > One more time: there is only so much I can say about the issue. Richard > Relph's message is inaccurate, but I can not describe why or how. > > Specific to the subject of this thread: The coreboot (it's not really a > BIOS, and yes, I'm splitting hairs) update addresses a Intel-issued > "specification clarification" for C2000-based systems. > > The Intel specification clarification is available at the following > location: > https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/atom-c2000-family-spec-update.pdf > > This specification clarification includes the following text on page 36: > > *“If your system does not use SERIRQ and BIOS puts SERIRQ in Quiet-Mode, > then the* > *weak external pull up resistor is not required. All other cases must > implement an* > *external pull-up resistor, 8.2k to 10k, tied to 3.3V.”* > > Since the LPC bus, including SERIRQ is not used in the SG-2xxx, SG-4xxx and > SG-8xxx systems, a software workaround for this specification clarification > has been implemented by ADI Engineering in v12 of coreboot for the affected > systems. The workaround disables SERIRQ to prevent indeterminate interrupt > behavior for these systems. > > The instructions on how to update all affected systems are at the following > URLs: > > https://www.netgate.com/docs/sg-2220/adi-bios-flash.html > https://www.netgate.com/docs/sg-2440/adi-bios-flash.html > https://www.netgate.com/docs/sg-4860/adi-bios-flash.html > https://www.netgate.com/docs/sg-4860-1u/adi-bios-flash.html > https://www.netgate.com/docs/sg-8860-1u/adi-bios-flash.html > > We are also working on a 'package' (for pfSense) that will do most of the > work outlined in this documentation. > > If you aren't running pfSense on your system, then there is a > different procedure, please contact Netgate customer support. > > We have tested this update and believe it to be low risk for you to > implement. However, we encourage you to always backup your configuration > before applying any update or change. > > We recommend that you update your affected systems at your earliest > convenience. > > Jim > > > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Richard A. Relph <rich...@relphs.com> > wrote: > >> Google “cisco intel atom issue” for some of the coverage of the problem. >> The symptom appears to be that on a reboot (power on? cold reset? warm >> reset?) the Atom may not generate LPC clocks… kinda fatal. But it seemingly >> doesn’t happen in the course of normal operation. >> >> Richard >> >>> On Mar 21, 2017, at 1:24 PM, Steve Yates <st...@teamits.com> wrote: >>> >>> Note despite the thread subject, the affected models are: >>> >>> SG-2220 >>> SG-2440 >>> SG-4860 >>> SG-8860 >>> SG-4860-1U >>> SG-8860-1U >>> >>> However, what is the symptom? We have a handful of these in service at >> various clients but have not noticed any issues that we're aware of. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> Steve Yates >>> ITS, Inc. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Jon >> Gerdes >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 12:57 PM >>> To: list@lists.pfsense.org >>> Subject: Re: [pfSense] Netgate Firmware >>> >>> >>> Topic: SG-2440 bios upgrade: >>> >>> https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=127418.msg703237#msg703237 >>> >>> >>> On Mon, 2017-03-20 at 19:49 -0500, Richard A. Relph wrote: >>>> OK, now you guys have me curious… >>>> >>>> I have a Netgate SG-2440 purchased directly from Netgate. I’ve >>>> received no emails. I don’t frequent the forums. But I am aware of an >>>> “alleged” chip issue, which I believe my unit is susceptible to. >>>> >>>> Can someone provide a link to a relevant forum thread? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Richard >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> pfSense mailing list >>> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list >>> Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold >> >> _______________________________________________ >> pfSense mailing list >> https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list >> Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold >> > _______________________________________________ > pfSense mailing list > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold _______________________________________________ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
