Re: Error in compiling STPC Consumer
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 05:54:17 + (GMT), Ramesh Chhaba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes Sir , u was right that I was missing that payload = line in configuration :) So I have aded that line and also enabled STD_FLASH and ELF_BOOT options and also added PAY_LOAD_SIZE = 64KB and ROM_SIZE =126KB But I want to make my romimage within 256KB So what options I acn change to do that currently my image is 356 (approx) KB PAY_LOAD_SIZE is not a maximum size. its the blocksize option thats used in the 'dd' statemnet that copies the payload into a file. So 64k is the minimum it will be but it could be 128k, 192k, 256k, etc. Make your ROM_SIZE be the size you want the image - payload size. You can see all the magic for this in the makefile that the config tool generates. I remember I had to tweak with my numbers till I got to to come out the right size. 356k seems a little large for just linubios and etherboot. How big is your payload? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Notebook 340s2 (sis630) 256k Flash
Just hope they didn't route the Flash write through the 87570. The micro has 2KB or ROM so you can't change that if it's been burned in. Does that mean something like if I rewrite the Flash, a Part of the old Bios is still in the ROM of the 87570. The modified code in flash will never be able to work? It means that the 87570 may have control of the write enable line on the flash. If its not asserted no writes to the flash will be possible unless you pull the chip. Figureing out whats involved in allowing the write line to be enabled usually requires snooping on the IO ports while the factory re-flash routine runs. Note: thats not the same as disassembling the factory re-flash code which could taint linuxbios with copyrighted code. How can I test this, is there any way? If you have access to a oscope then you can watch the write enable and the chip enable lines while running the linuxbios flash routine they must both be asserted at the time you try to write to the flash. If you are software only then boot bochs on the machine and enable IO logging then run the factory re-flash. If it does a buch of port IO to the 87570 prior to starting to program then WE has a good chance of being under its control and you will have to duplicate that IO prior to and/or while running the linuxbios reflash. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Error in compiling STPC Consumer
Second thing I have got the BIOS writer guide for STPC So If I think I changes the replaces the code of STPC_ELITE for that of STPC_ATLAS then I can make it for STPC_ATLAS If you are going to have to do a lot of re-write work I encourage you to start over with V2. V1 is a dead end product and will be very difficult for the linuxbios developers to support you as we are all focusing on V2. V2 is so much nicer to work with compared to V1. In V2 almost everything is in C rather than assembly, even all your RAM init code is C due to Eric's marvelous romcc which is a C compiler designed to use registers rather than RAM. The STPC Atlas is basically a fast cryix 486 so I don't know what impact that has on romcc due to its smaller register set and if its been tested on that arch much but its shouldn't be too much effort to make it work. Right Eric? I'll be happy to help you with V2. We have several boards that use the Atlas here at bitworks and I'd love to see them boot linuxbios rather than what we are using now. However, since what I have now works I don't have much leverage at spending developemnt $$ on replacing it. It would be really nice however to be able to boot from IDE CD-ROM or USB which is something our current BIOS can't do. But I have systems that I can test on and help you get V2 up and going. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Error in compiling STPC Consumer
this is a clear FAQ entry. For v1 yes but not for v2 and most of our docs now are all for v2. I think I would still make v1 people ask so we can tell them not to use v1. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: developing new BIOS
I alsoo need the help regarding when to write code for BIOS what sequence should I follow I mean which part to init first and which to next Ex . 1. Enable flat mode 2. init memory then ?? Are you following the examples from the BIOS Writers guide on the ST dev site? I think it may help with your questions. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Error in compiling STPC Consumer
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 06:53:22 + (GMT), Ramesh Chhaba [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am using tulip.zelf as payload that I have taken from the rom-o-matic I have copied this file to the place of linux kernel But when i compile it ,it gives eorror. 6+0 records in 6+0 records out /bin/cp -f linuxbios.rom /root/linuxbios_stpc.bin objcopy -O binary -R .note -R .comment -S /usr/src/linux//vmlinux linux.bin objcopy: there are no sections to be copied! make: *** [linux.bin] Error 1 -- Its still trying to add a kernel to your image. Check your payload statement. LinuxBIOS however built. That's whats in linuxbios_stpc.bin it just does not have a payload. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: PCI oddities, OT?
Now something strange happens: The Riser allows to jumper the IDSEL/AD to 12 different positions, all but one position lead to a collision of 2 PCI cards, yes, only in one position i have a collision. You have a board with 12 different PCI devices on it? Yikes. Now the strange thing is, that only in this position i can access both devices (video-cards) properly (one card is then conflicting with the onboard network card). You will have to tell us what you mean by conflicting. IO space, memory space or what? Your description dosen't have enough info in it. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: PCI oddities, OT?
You have a board with 12 different PCI devices on it? Yikes. No, it are more, see below ;-) #lspci 00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM Host Bridge (rev 02) 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corp. 82852/855GM Integrated Graphics 00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82801DB USB (Hub #1) (rev 02) 00:1e.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corp. 82801BA/CA/DB/EB PCI Bridge (rev 82) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corp. 82801DB LPC Interface Controller (rev 02) 01:03.0 Multimedia controller: Philips Semiconductors SAA7146 (rev 01) 01:07.0 Multimedia video controller: Brooktree Corporation Bt878 Video Capture 01:09.0 FireWire (IEEE 1394): Texas Instruments TSB43AB22/A IEEE-1394a-2000 Controller (PHY/Link) Ok so you have 2 pci buses one with 5 devices and one with 3 and you are trying to plug the BT device into Bus 1 to make it 4 devices. But thats not the point - it is the PCI-Riser-Card which allows me to set the IDSEL for one of the PCI-Slots, that means, if i set the jumper to another location, the board at 01:07 moves to 01:09 of 01:0F - it changes the device-number used. If your riser card (which BTW unless it has a bridge is not allowed by the PCI spec) has 12 AD lines that can attach to the IDSEL line but you only have 3 devices on your bus I don't see how you can have a conflict with 11 of those 12 devices. Seems at maximum you should only be able to conflict with 3 of the 12. Now the strange thing is, that only in this position i can access both devices (video-cards) properly (one card is then conflicting with the onboard network card). The onboard network card (intel) is exactly at 01:07 - but not listed above, obviously because the Bt878 is sitting in its place. I'm confused. Your video cards are on bus 0 how does that relate to conflicts on Bus 1? If i move the Bt878 to, say 01:0F i cannot access it, although listed via lspci, it simply wont work, the network card is then visible and functional. (currently running 2.6.3 but same with 2.6.10 kernel). Hmmm.. That seems like some sort of driver issue. If it shows in an lspci then the rest is all driver stuff. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: PCI oddities, OT?
Well - it was the one available for the mini-itx-case as low profile one, no doubt the manufacturers know why they do not use bridges... Ah I'm probably talking about a different device. The riser PCI cards I'm thinking of will generally add too much extra capacitance to the bus. The clock spec is only expects one connector between the devices. However, if you don't have a full bus then you can get by. The PCI spec is tight but you can push it pretty far out of spec. No, no! The conflicting devices are indeed on the same bus 1, theoretically it would look like this: 01:07.0 Network controller: Intel ... 01:07.0 Multimedia video controller: Brooktree Corporation Bt878 Video Sorry I was confusing your VGA devices with your BT framegrabber. I guessed it must be a problem with interrupt or DMA not working or the card not being correctly initialised (PCI-memory ranges), just wild guesses. Sounds like you will have to work with the driver writer(s). -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Geode GX1 and IRQ tables
Looking at Stefan's /dev/bios code I see the use of 6 to enable write access to the flash. But I don't see the ability to disable the CS5530A's claim of the read cycle. So no way to map F elsewhere. I'm kind of doubtful on this. ROM shadowing has been part of chipsets for a long time and it seems really odd that they would just leave it out. Do you have the factory bios for the board? If so fire it up and make dd read from the f area and then watch the chip select on the bios chip to see if its asserted. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
The ADLO loader needs to handle the conversion from the format linuxbios uses and whatever bochs bios uses. Currently the loader is terribly primitive. Bochs dosen't use any of those tables IIRC. The ADLO build just sticks them in the image file and they get block copied by the loader along with the rest of the code. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
Richard, can you please make one and post it? Then I can drop it in the wiki if you don't have time. Here's my additions to the ADLO serial patch. This will output info to both the video head and the serial port. I also preserved the original full redirect which may be useful if writes to the video device crash things. Setting DEBUG_SERIAL_REDIR to 1 enables the serial only redirect. So DEBUG_SERIAL controls if serial output is done at all and _REDIR if its only serial or both serial and video. Somebody either apply it or stick it somewhere useful. -- Richard A. Smith adlo_serial.diff Description: Binary data
diff help
I'm trying to create the patch for my 440bx stuff but I need some help. I have a bunch of new files that I added in the tree. So 'cvs diff' dosen't know about these files and dosen't show anything on the diffs. If I check out a new copy of the repository and then diff vs that I get loads of changes in the CVS directories. Whats the best way to do this? Can I make diff ignore certain directory patterns? I don't see anything in the man page about excluding directories just files. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: diff help
I always do something like cvs update | grep ^? | cut -f2 -d\ |while read name do diff -uN /dev/null $name mypatch.newfiles.diff done but it is not exactly elegant I can't seem to make that work. Do I have to protect something from the shell? I get a bash: syntax error near unexpected token 'done' -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: diff help
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 19:41:28 +0100, Stefan Reinauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't seem to make that work. Do I have to protect something from the shell? I get a bash: syntax error near unexpected token 'done' What version of bash are you using? It seems to work fine here. echo $BASH_VERSION 3.00.0(1)-release Try replacing the diff with an echo $name to see what's wrong. You also need to watch the space after '-d\ ' Same error. my $BASH_VERSION is 2.05b.0(1)-release Don't worry about it. I just created 2 trees and made a find command that nuked the CVS directories. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Geode GX1 and IRQ tables
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 17:08:20 -0800 (PST), ramesh bios [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As for watching the chip select line, I'd love to do that but I don't have a logic analyzer or probes. I guess I could do it with an LED and a sharpened wire but I'd rather not risk damage to my board. :-) Oh. for some reason I thought you had a scope. You couldn't do it with an LED anyway the signal is too fast (you would never see it) and it doubtful that the chip select line would be able to source enough current to light and LED anyway. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Does anybody needs LinuxBIOS for VMware virtual machines?
As I found on some chipsets, the CPU can be too fast, and it should: 1. start op 2. wait for 'smbus active' indicator to go to 1 3. wait for 'smbus active' indicator to go to 0 is this by any chance your problem? The code is basiclly a port of the working V1 assembly code converted to C. I seem to remember that the V1 code did exactly what you are talking about. Perhaps I goofed up a flag polarity or some other core piece of info while doing it. I'll whip up a patch today when I get to work and post it up for anyone interested to look at. Perhaps a fresh set of eyes will catch the issue. I'll need a place to upload to. Or I guess you can commit to CVS. Didn't someone mention that they were going to provide space for stuff like this? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Does anybody needs LinuxBIOS for VMware virtual machines?
How difficult is it to port Intel 440BX chipset support from V1 to V2? easy. Been done. Ask Richard Smith. Been working on it. Not even close to done. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Re[2]: Build error on the EPIA-M
RS I don't think in-kernel will be enough. pcmica services depend on the RS card manager deamon to detect device insertions and register the RS device. cardmgr is user space. No, you're a bit wrong. PCMCIA services do not _depend_ on cardmgr. They may take advantage of it, but do not depend on it. The only case when you need cardmgr is for removable (not potentially, but actually) devices. If you place your CF card into EPIA MII once and for all, you can easily load all your pcmcia drivers manually (or put them in-kernel) and have a working PCMCIA IDE. I did a test where I did exactly that. And the IDE device did not appear until I ran cardmgr even though both the card bridge driver and ide-cs were compiled in. I'm guessing thought that cardmgr just knows the right /proc/ things to tickle to make the IDE device appear. Do you happen to know what those are? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Does anybody needs LinuxBIOS for VMware virtual machines?
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 10:31:41 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you haven't already tried... maybe a few out's to port 0x80 to slow things down. Thats a pretty quick and easy test. I'll do that in a bit and see what happens. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Does anybody needs LinuxBIOS for VMware virtual machines?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you haven't already tried... maybe a few out's to port 0x80 to slow things down. Thats a pretty quick and easy test. I'll do that in a bit and see what happens. No change. I still get all 0xff's (not all zeros like I said earlier) I think I'm a victim of my own cleverness. Digging back into the code I now rember that my port is _not_ just a port of the V1 assembly. Its a total rewrite. My port is heavly based on the AMD solo board. Thats the mainboard that had a superIO closest to mine and out of all the boards I looked at the AMD north and southbridge code was the cleanist and easiest to follow. So I basically took the smbus code from the amd8111 and changed the register defines and bit flags to match the i440bx. Well at least thats the theory. Obviously I got something wrong. The structure for the sm_bus read already has a delay function in it. It was only one out(80,80) I bumped it up to 6 but no change. I suspect that one of my flags is just incorrect. What needs to happen is lots of debug prints to watch the status register and verify that a single read really does the right thing. I was kinda hopeing it would just work. Sigh. I can't really mess with it again till this weekend but if someone else wants the code let me know. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 09:53:03 -0800, yhlu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So need to make shadowing work in V2 before make ADLO working...? which region? 0xf - 0xf and 0xc- 0xc. Look at util/ADLO/loader.s That shows you the ranges. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Does anybody needs LinuxBIOS for VMware virtual machines?
I think I'll just clean this structure up a bit ... it's just an smbus controller ... how hard can it be? It was more like. Hey this is known to work and it looks like it does exaclty the same thing. All I have to do change the bits. PC hardware. blech. I don't have any 440 stuff left. You should. What did you do with my XMS system I sent you long ago? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: we need to sequence this
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:23:48 -0700, Li-Ta Lo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2005-03-08 at 14:32, YhLu wrote: why does the Linux kernel use bitkeeper? YH I seem to remember it was because bitkeeper has really advanced patch handling and merging tools. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Does anybody needs LinuxBIOS for VMware virtual machines?
You should. What did you do with my XMS system I sent you long ago? oh, I still have it. ok, I'll try to bring it out and revive it. Ok. I'll whip up a patch for v2 and send it to you. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Does anybody needs LinuxBIOS for VMware virtual machines?
Ok. I'll whip up a patch for v2 and send it to you. I'm trying to do a cvs diff command that will show all the new files I've added to my V2 tree. Whats the magic options? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 14:44:41 -0800, yhlu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: some questions 1. Where is the defacto location for the serial patch for ADLO? There isn't one. Search the archvies or I'll have to make you one later on tonight. 2. about vga init, linuxbios v2 already init that and copy that into 0xc, ADLO still need vga...bin, or let the ADLO do vga init If you are doing ADLO anyway it may be best to just let ADLO do it but x86emu is certainly more flexable. I guess its up to you... -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: The way to use a custom BIOS for VMware virtual machines
to a VM's config file: bios440.filename = path to the BIOS ROM file The BIOS has to support Intel 440BX chipset and in general doesn't need significant changes to support the virtual chipset: we do a good job emulating 440BX. Does it do all the status bits of the smbus controller? Perhaps I (or you) can debug my smbus routines with it? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
There isn't one. Search the archvies or I'll have to make you one later on tonight. We need to fix this in the wiki on the ADLO page: /!\ FixMe Where is the defacto location for the serial patch? Richard, can you please make one and post it? Then I can drop it in the wiki if you don't have time. Well then looks like I'm the defacto location. I've actually improved it since the original anyway. It can now do both video and serial output simultainously. I don't know if I have that stuff here with me @ home. If not then I'll send the patch in tommorow. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
We need to fix this in the wiki on the ADLO page: /!\ FixMe Where is the defacto location for the serial patch? Richard, can you please make one and post it? Then I can drop it in the wiki if you don't have time. Well then looks like I'm the defacto location. I've actually improved it since the original anyway. It can now do both video and serial output simultainously. I just checked CVS and the serial patch is already in. Hmm I don't remember doing that but it got in there somehow. Not my new and improved one but the original. You activate it by setting DEBUG_SERIAL to 1 in ./util/ADLO/bochs/bios/rombios.c and rebuild. Then its just like the wiki says you won't get any video output because all prints are directed out the serial port. I've got to run right now but later on tonight I'll ssh in to work and pick up my fix that does both video and serial. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: we need to sequence this
??? I thought vfat support long filenames. I believe it is the length of the pathname rather than individual filenames. Although some filenames may also be affected. I really don't understand it either. This is my dim recollection from watching some of the conversation. It probally due to the fact that relative paths are limited to 255 characters. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
this in CMOS... 3. VGA BIOS already be copied by LinuxBIOS, but should still need let ADLO know the dev and fun of that .--- put that in CMOS? 4. mptable is alredy in the RAM. Any suggestion about 1 and 2. If you use CMOS then make sure the code dosen't depend on some sort of preformatting of the CMOS area. My board fex dosen't have battery backed up CMOS so anything in there is only good until you power cycle. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Does anybody needs LinuxBIOS for VMware virtual machines?
How difficult is it to port Intel 440BX chipset support from V1 to V2? Not terribly hard. It is more of a time/desire thing. Does vmware accurately simulate what is required to bring memory up or do we Yep. not to bad. I've got the beginnings of the port already done. I got hung up on getting my dump_spd routine to return somthing else besides zero. Its really wierd. I can actually see the data on the SMbus happening but I don't ever seem to get a result back. Like Eric says if you don't have to to the RAM init then it will probally move really quickly. I haven't had chance to work on it for a while. If your are interested I can whip up a patch vs current cvs and send it to you. It's not in the V2 tree. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD? I talked to freebsd guys about it. Freebsd makes BIOS calls, so that would need to be fixed. That or see if it works with ADLO. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: ASUS and linuxbios
ASUS boards in general. The K8V-X uses the VIA K8T800 chipset, which seems to be fairly common. Is anyone working on this? Is ASUS amiable to linuxbios? What's the word on the street? Not really. A lot of the ASUS boards worked with so far have special things done to the SMbus and thus the SPD can't be read with knowing what bits in the northbridge to tweak. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Anyone tried LinuxBIOS with freeBSD?
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 15:37:31 -0600, Bari Ari [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://wiki.linuxbios.org/ADLO That info is all from my V1 stuff and ADLO is not in V2 yet. However its just a elf payload just like anything else so it will load fine. It won't run until you get the shadowing right. I don't remember what the final result of our V2 shadowing discussion was. I seem to remember that we thought we could do an elf location trick that might make the mainboard specific shadowing in ADLO unnecessary. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Fw: Re: Documentation [was: new FSF campaign ..]
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 08:05:06 -0700 (MST), Ronald G. Minnich rminnich@lanl.gov wrote: On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Peter Karlsson wrote: Ok, thanks again for educating me! so, peter, you want to accumulate the Glossary for us :-) A tehnical glossary would be nice but one thing we _really_ need is a listing of all config options and what they do. This was (and still is) one of the largest hurdles for me. And its one of the things that Google won't find much on. I compiled part of a list for V1 and its in my FAQ I put out but V2 is all new to me. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Fw: Re: Documentation [was: new FSF campaign ..]
listing of all config options and what they do. This was (and still is) one of the largest hurdles for me. And its one of the things that Google won't find much on. Should this be generated automatically out of Options.lb? There is a lot of description in that file already. Thats a good idea. What about adding a description section where this info is filled out. Then the config tool would generate some sort of text file in the target directory describing all the options that are set. You could perhaps add some dependency info in there as well. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
FAQ question fixup
I've been adding selected info from my V1 FAQ up into the wiki. The
following is some info I compiled up on V1 start up.
If someone(s) would update this for V2 and post it t the wiki I think
it would be very useful.
Help! I'm a newbie and I'm completely lost in the code.
There seem to be two main parts to linuxbios. The first is
arch/{arch}/config/ctr0.base which does the very low level initialization,
like turning on memory, etc. The second is arch/{arch}/lib/c_start.S which
does whatever else is necessary to call the C function hardwaremain().
hardwaremain() then does whatever else is necessary to load linux.
c_start.S is linked with linuxbios.a, a library containing generic support
routines (those found in the lib directory) and anything specified using the
'object' directive in a Config file (and other stuff). The resultant
'executable' is called linuxbios_c. The loader script used to link
linuxbios_c is config/linuxbios_c.ld, and is configured to be
loaded relative
to _RAMBASE.
crt0.base is not linked against anything. Any additional assembly routines
you need must be specified using the 'mainboardinit' directive in a Config
file. This causes the specified assembly file to be added to
crt0_includes.h which is in turn included at the start of crt0.base (or at
the end in the case of the ppc version). The loader script used to link
crt0.base is in arch/{arch}/config/ldscript.base. The resultant 'executable'
is called linuxbios and will be loaded at _ROMBASE. The tricky thing is that
this loader script will also load the linuxbios_c 'executable' at a location
called _payload in this file. The main task of crt0.base is then to
initialize enough hardware so that this payload can be copied from rom into
ram (which may also involve uncompressing code). Then control is transferred
to _start, which is the first location in linuxbios_c.
To get an idea of how crt0.base works, look at the following files. This is
the order of execution specified by the configuration file for sis735.
cpu/i386/entry16.inc
cpu/i386/entry32.inc
superio/sis/950/setup_serial.inc
pc80/serial.inc
arch/i386/lib/console.inc
cpu/k7/earlymtrr.inc
northsouthbridge/sis/735/raminit.inc
arch/i386/config/crt0.base
Next look at c_start.S which will show you what happens once control is
transferred to _start. Finally, look at
arch/{arch}/lib/hardwaremain.c to see
what other stuff is done to get linux loaded.
Most other files are specific to particular hardware, so it can be pretty
confusing to just browse the tree.
--
Richard A. Smith
___
Linuxbios mailing list
Linuxbios@clustermatic.org
http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Geode GX1 and IRQ tables
And if that were done, Linux would not need to parse a PIRQ table, yes? LinuxBIOS does not do that, it provides the tables and requires the OS to do so. I've found that Linux up to 2.6.9 (I haven't tested .10) Dosen't do this fully. With my 440bx chipset there are config registers in the northbridge that control which IRQ line each of the PCI PIRQ lines are routed to. Even with a proper PIRQ table these registers are not setup and I get the same error reported. I have code in my final_mainboard_fixup() that sets these registers such that they match my table and then every thing works fine. I suggest you diff the output of lspci -xxx for the northbridge between linubios and factory bios and resolve all the differences with the datasheet. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: new free software foundation crusade: http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/free-bios.html
So would someone who DOES have an account please edit the login page to put a mailto link there to allow users to at least know that the UI on that page isn't as described in the error you get when you try to create an account the way the page says to do so? It's guaranteed to be an FAQ which will bother everyone more than the time it would take to fix it on the page. You might also note the the login is case sensitive. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Build error on the EPIA-M
it was my understanding that the reason the pcmcia/cardbus stuff got integrated into kernel in the first place was to support booting from such devices. I believe you are correct but I seem to remember that it will only be posible via early userspace due to the database lookup cardmgr has to do. I just did a test with my adapter. I compiled bot the bridge driver and the ide-cs into my 2.6.10 kernel, moved cardmgr to cardmgr.norun and re-booted. The bridge was found but the ide-cs device was not. Running /sbin/cardmgr.norun by hand enabled the ide-cs like normal. So looks to me like its still dependent on cardmgr. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Hi 440lx chipset
I don't know what the difference between the 440LX and BX is Buta as long as the ram registers are the same the 440bx stuff should work fine. Unless they have done something messy with the access to the SPD on the ram. I just look on developer.intel.com and fouind the 440LX datasheet. At my (really) quick glance it looks very similar to the BX. You might just get lucky and have it come up and work. What's the FSB speed of that board? Can it do 100Mhz or only 66? I've no idea either, but I'll try and give it a shot. It'll probably be Sunday before I get the chance to do anything, though. Ok I would suggest that you start with a copy of the bitworks board. (mainboard/bitworks/ims) change the superIO and rework the ROM size to match your board and work from there. OK, asking the great Google in the sky: MS-6117 superio resulted in a single hit, with the following line. Superio: Winbond 977TF rev 0 found at port 3F0h (I can probably verify that by eyeball the motherboard at some point) Does that sound promising? Yes. Theres a few number missing but thats probally a w83977tf. Theres a w83977ef in the tree. I'm sure the differences between the tf and ef are really minor. But check your number and google for the datasheet on the part. Let me send you my config file. I't probally won't compile against the stock V1 tree since I think I've added several config options for my own use but those should be pretty easy to fix. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Via EPIA-MII ROM speed?
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 08:32:43 -0800, Adam Talbot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How fast is the ROM chip MB/s. In my case a SST 39SF020A 70-4C-NH. I was trying to figure out what would be faster... Linuxbios calling a 2.6 kernel off the hard drive, or loading my 2.6 kernel out of the rom file. I have the 512k rom chips, so I have room to add my kernel. If I put my kernel into the rom, can I just call it as a payload? -Adam Your challenge won't be loading speed but rather getting a kernel in 512k. That said my first guess is that in ROM is going to be much faster on all but a few special cases but lets just do some math and see... For loading from the BIOS chip you are talking ISA cycles. Which is approx 1uS per cycle but you are only going to get 8 bits at a time unless you happend to have a 16-Bit flash. Lets neglect RAM speed since it should be the same in both cases. The string copy functions of x86 assembly will let you set up a block memory move with basiclly no overhead. So you should be able to load the entire ROM into a block of RAM in 525 mS. Reading from IDE will happen over the PCI bus which is much faster. I don't really know what the actual cycle time of PCI is sine it varies but the clock is 4 tims faster so lets assume we can get 4x the cycle rate or 250 ns per cycle. Ide devices are 16 bit so we are going to approx 8x the data rate. However, the HD involes a seek for every 512 16 bit words. I don't think FILO takes advantage of the streaming commands. So for every 1kb we are talking 128uS of data time and 10 to 12 ms avg seek. so 512 x 12.128 mS give you 6.2 seconds. But thats a worst case number and neglects the cache of a modern HD. If the HD is able to cache up the entire 512k so the seek times are 0 then the number would have a low of .128 mS * 512 = 65mS. That's negelecting the overhead with issuing the read commands to the IDE device so in reality its higher than that. So the only answer is you have to test and see. Could be faster could be slower. Also if you take in account harddisk spinup time from a cold boot which is always going to be larger than .5s it in ROM will be faster. But if you use something like a compact flash you don't have the hd platter spinup time. Then its going to depend on the device. I'd be intersted in hearing about your results. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Hi 440lx chipset
there are no stupid questions, this stuff is hard. We would be very grateful for your help. I would start with richard smith's 440bx port on V2. Yeah that would be great.. _If_ it worked. I got stuck getting data back from the SM controller. Its really wierd. I can see data happening on the SMbus with a scope but I always get zeros back when I try to dump the SPD values. I had to back burner it for now... Its really hard to justify spending the time on moving to V2 when V1 pretty much does what we need. I'll get it eventually though. Paul? How are your hacking skills? Do you write C code? I could sure use the help in the V2 port. The southbridge between the BX and LX family is exactly the same chip so anything you did would be 100% re-useable. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Hi 440lx chipset
Silly question #1: what is V1 and V2? Do these map to the two modules under sourceforge CVS: freebios and freebios2? Which tree is better to use and more likely to work? V1 is the only tree that can work. I haven't even given anybody my V2 patches which don't work yet anyway. So V1 is currently your only option. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Hi 440lx chipset
Quick (cheeky) question: does LinuxBIOS support the 440LX chipset? I don't know what the difference between the 440LX and BX is Buta as long as the ram registers are the same the 440bx stuff should work fine. Unless they have done something messy with the access to the SPD on the ram. PPS output from lspci: What superIO is on it? if your superIO supported then V1 should at least come up and try to setup the ram. If not then the differences might be pretty easy to work out by some northbridge dumps. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: VGABIOS
There has been talk of adding emu86 to the kernel. Where's the source for your 32K version? I'd also like to look at your code for setting up the environment to run the VBIOS. PPC/IA64 people have been asking for us to add emu86 support so that they can reset their cards. With a 32K emu86 there is no need for us to use vm86 mode. John, The 32k version is still a proof of concept for now. Paulo Marques did all the work on reducing the emulator size down. He felt it was _possible_ to get it to 32k. Paulos version is based on the Xfree86 emu from the xfree project. There are 2 other trees. One from SciTech soft and Ollies (linuxbios) tree. They all are mostly the same. Especially for the actual x86 emulation part. SciTech soft is the Full upstream tree and Xfree (X.org) would perodically sync up push back/pull from improvements from SciTech. I've copied Kendall Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] from scitech as he may have some additional info for you. The LB tree is from a Xfree snapshot of long ago. Most of the changes to the LB tree are tweaks for proper VGA and PCI bios interrupt support. To my knowledge Paulos version has never been tested. I'm sending you the source for Paulos stuff from my Yahoo account in a different mail. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: VGABIOS
The emulator is slightly larger than 32KB. For the Tyan S2885 mainboard, the difference of the final romimage is 41376 bytes. Actuall, it is for uncompress romimage. For compressed image, it is about 16KB. Wow. I didn't realize that the Linuxbios verison would compile down and compress so small. If you apply Paulos work to all that it might get a lot smaller. I remember Paulo saying that there was lots of code duplication in the x86 instruction emulation that could be consolidated. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: VGABIOS
get a lot smaller. I remember Paulo saying that there was lots of code duplication in the x86 instruction emulation that could be consolidated. I think Ollie did this already. Ah. Well that would explain why is so much smaller. Looking back through my mail I see where he mentioned that he was going to try it but I don't see a mention of it after that. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: VGABIOS
code duplication in the x86 instruction emulation that could be consolidated. It is Paulo's work. Ah well there you go. My knowledge was outdated. Looks like the cutting edge of x86emu developement now is the linuxbios emu tree. Did you also extend Paulo's work? He mentioned that there were other areas in the code where application of his work should reduce code size as well. If they haven't already submitted thier patches you might want to also check with Scitech soft on thier version of the in-kernel emu. Thier commercial snap drivers use the same stuff and I seem to remember him telling me they made some tweaks to make the newer Radeon cards and the like work right. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: NTV-1000 STB
and if so, would LinuxBios support the cipset? I am at work at the moment, so I cant give you the chipset part numbers, but if you need them I will send them when I get home. - SMSC FDC37C665GT (SuperIO) - OPTi 82C802GA (Northbridge?) - OPTi 82C602A (RTC/companion chip?) - OPTi 82C931 (Audio) - Davicom DM9008F (LAN) - IGS CyberPro 2010 (VGA + TV out) - Philips SAA 7111A (TV in) Looks like your pretty much out of luck for Linuxbios. No support for the OPTi chipset. From what I saw from google you might be able to get a boot rom from ROM-o-matic for the davicom card. Although one poster said he had to make mods to the etherboot loader since there is no INT19 support in the BIOS of the device and the NOINT19 stuff in etherboot didn't work. Perhaps thats all fixed now. Geting it to dhcp a linux kernel and then dumping the northbridge and sourthbridge settings is probably your only chance unless of course you can find a datasheet for OPTi somewhere. You should be able to get the SMC superIO to work pretty easily. All in all I would say the ROI on that is very low. Probably not worth the effort. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [BULK] RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
something I have been wondering. Suppose someone starts working on that IDE driver to fix it for once in bochs bios. Won't we find out that getting it work right is chip-set specific thing? curently bochs bios is based on intel 440fx chipset or some such. I don't think so. FILO does it right. Is it chipset specific? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [BULK] RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
I don't think so. FILO does it right. Is it chipset specific? It just uses the generic IDE io interface. No chipset specifics are needed for IDE. Booting USB or PCMCIA is a bit trickier though. So there you go. Bochs shoud be able to be made generic. I think it is generic right now but I seem to remember that it did some stuff with delays rather than checking the busy flag and that was the difference between the ADLO that worked and the latest stuff. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [BULK] RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
I still remmber an IDE code that would work with Samsung HDD's but not IBM hdd's. So it is possible to have disk/chipset specific code. Thats buggy IDE hardware either the host chipset or the drive. I've written lowlevel IDE routines for another project that do direct LBA sector reads and the interface to that is outlined in a spec and not in anyway chipset specific. now all we need someone to fix the code :-) Pehaps we could get the bochs people to do it. Some e-mail to them with our modified routines from ADLO would at least generate some feeback on what they thought the most correct setup is. But is it currently even a problem? What does the latest bochs bios do that the ADLO dosen't? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [BULK] RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
Well seems to me that if the movement toward according to the spec is causes a problem then the project as a whole has an issue that ought to be worked out. Actually thinking about this more... I can probally see thier point. They don't have hardware so implementation of all the flags and register correctness is just overhead. However to even worry about going through this you gotta have a need first and currently I don't think I need it so someone else will probally have to do it or show me why I need it. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: dead bios
I just attempted to flash my epia M1 with the official latest bios from via (and their stupid awflsomething program) and the mobo is dead. Is the bios chip mounted on the pcb or socketed? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: dead bios
Is the bios chip mounted on the pcb or socketed? it's socketed Find someone with a programer and re-burn the chip or send it to me and I'll program it for you. Is there not some sort of recovery jumper? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Open Source BIOS is not only choice.
Proposal: Just use proprietary BIOS. you can buy it from BIOS upgrading company. and even I think you MIGHT be able to use a BIOS comes with your PC. Your proposal dosen't make any sense. Why on earth would you want to boot LinuxBIOS only to then boot into a proprietary BIOS? When you could have just booted the proprietary BIOS in the first place. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Open Source BIOS is not only choice.
For booting Windows after you installed linuxbios. You still aren't makeing sense to me. Booting a COTS bios after you boot linuxbios to boot windows is a regression not an advancement. You aren't getting any extra features. You are just adding complexity. If you are going to boot a COTS bios then just boot the COTS bios you don't need linuxbios. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Open Source BIOS is not only choice.
It makes sense if you usually want to boot Linux, but sometimes want to boot Windows. If you have a setup that you are doing dual boot on I don't really see why you would be a canidate for using Linuxbios. Not in its current state anyway. I guess if nothing else it would be a good technical exercise and perhapas if you do it they will come. That would really show off the flexability side of things. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Boot Windows Please!
Look at Adam Sulmicki's ADLO work, he did something very similar to this. I currently use ADLO so I might be able to answer your questions. I've only sucessfully booted linux via LILO under ADLO. I mostly use ADLO to get the video bios up and going. I've tried to boot a MSDOS compact flash but it seems to hang somewhere so I didn't progress any further. I don't see any reason that ADLO sould not be able to boot FreeDOS. ADLO is a deriative of the bios from the bochs project so if you can get bochs to boot FreeDOS or MSDOS then the same should be possible under ADLO. At one point I tried to sync up ADLO with the current version of the bochs bios but it would not boot. The IDE routines in ADLO seem to be more correct than the stock stuff in bochs. ADLO is currently only in V1 but I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work in V2 as well. Its just a payload. One thing about ADLO is that the loader has to be customized to the chipset. The loader has to enable the shadow ram section and copy itself into that range. Since there is no mechanism to do this across payloads you have to do it explicitly in the loader. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
Thinking about ADLO and the shadow enable/disable got some wheels turning. I've been spending lots of time in V2 and I was wondering if the same type of methodology can't work for ADLO. In V2 there are specifc .c files that do thing in a chipset specific way and the auto.c includes them as necesary. Those get compiled and then stuck in the startup assembly. What if we created a shadow.c file that was in the northbridge directory with a simple API type setup that enabled and disabled the various shadow ranges. Then the ADLO build system could just romcc these files and the loader would include them just like crt0.S does. That way there are no callbacks across the payload boundry yet you could setup ADLO or other payloads so they would work in a chipset agnostic way. I suppose that that FILO and the emulator render most of ADLO un-needed but if you are going to try and use FreeDOS or Windoze as an OS then you will need ADLO. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [BULK] RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 13:12:27 -0600, Richard Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But I actually think that is overkill. v2 by default and design enables all of the shadow ranges as memory. So we just need to use those ranges. That should be much easier having to patch ADLO each time. It is fairly unlikely a writable ROM segment is Ok.. Well when you put it that way yeah dosen't sound like its needed at all. It should probally just work. Wait a minute. I don't see how this will work. To do the shadows you need to read from the bios chip, yet write to the RAM. Then re-enable both read and writes to go to RAM. This requires you to toggle some bits in the norhtbridge. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [BULK] RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
But I actually think that is overkill. v2 by default and design enables all of the shadow ranges as memory. So we just need to use those ranges. That should be much easier having to patch ADLO each time. It is fairly unlikely a writable ROM segment is Ok.. Well when you put it that way yeah dosen't sound like its needed at all. It should probally just work. I't will be awhile but I guess I will find out when I get there. I'm planning on still trying to use ADLO when I get V2 up and going on our board. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Boot Windows Please!
or perhaps to put it other way around; 95% of current problems with BOCHS bios is related to the ide driver. Get IDE driver right and it is quite possible most of the stuff will work. I think that I when I remeber looking at the diff between ADLO and the latest bochs stuff that the ADLO stuff payed attention to some status bits that the stock bochs stuff didn't. Plus the ADLO IDE stuff worked where the latest bochs stuff did not. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [BULK] RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/freebios/freebios/util/ADLO/loader.s?rev=1.1view=auto it mentions sources as 0x8000 and 0x18000, so I guess they have been aready copied out of rom into the the low memory by linuxbios ??? (i think that's part of the ELF header specs to tell LB where to put the image). So you think the ELF loader loads into ram and then loader moves it into the right position? I wonder if we could not just set things up where the ELF loader just loas it into the right spot in the first place. Perhaps that overwrites where the ELF code lives? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: [BULK] RFC: Generic shadow mechanism useable from a payload
Yes you can do that with ELF. The big gotcha is going to be that there are pirq tables current stored at 0xf that you are not going to want to stomp. Actually thats not that much of an issue. It currently stomps it already ADLO has that table broken out into a single binary file. All I do is copy the table binary table generated with linubios into the adlo build file and it gets stuck in the adlo image. Loader.s copies it to a specific location. So really if you loaded loader and ADLO code after the linuxbios PIRQ table location and then tweaked loader to not make a PIRQ it should be fine. Not haveing to do the PIRQ table copy would be nice but its pretty trival. A script to do it automatically would be easy. The fun question. Can I make the bochs bios useable on a system after the linux kernel has run. Load it with kexec and then boot windows? If LinuxBIOS is the native bios this should be no extra challenge. If the native BIOS is something else life gets a little more interesting. That _is_ a fun quesition.. I don't think you would have too many problems though. The ADLO bios is used to running on systems that already have everything setup. It does minimal hardware setup. If you put everything in the right spot and modified the loader so that it didn't copy anything I think it will work. kexec loads an elf right? So this would be pretty easy to test. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Another V2 question
Man the waters just get deeper. I though auto.c was first. I just
looked at failover.c and the fallback does a 'retun bist' so who
called failover.c?
Can you list out the boot sequence for me step by step? Who calls what?
It is the order they are listed in Config.lb.
Or more simply the order the included files are included into crt0.S
just like in freebios v1. There is just an extra step to build the assembly
code now.
Thanks, I guess I'll just have to go through the code. What I was
trying to get was a call tree detailed enough that I could document it
in my write up on porting to my chipset.
Why does that require them to be after the big block of includes?
You can't just stick them all up at the beginning of the .c file?
snip
So the file that uses them is included after the functions are
defined.
I don't seem to be getting my question across properly
Whats the difference for romcc between what I see in the code which looks like:
#include header1.h
#include cfile1.c
void func1(void)
{
}
#include header2.h
#include cfile2.c
void func2(void)
{
}
#include header3.h
#include cfile3.c
void func3(void)
{
}
And what I perceive as a normal setup of :
#include header1.h
#include header2.h
#include header3.h
#include cfile1.c
#include cfile2.c
#include cfile3.c
void func1(void)
{
}
void func2(void)
{
}
void func3(void)
{
}
--
Richard A. Smith
___
Linuxbios mailing list
Linuxbios@clustermatic.org
http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Another V2 question
Whats the difference for romcc between what I see in the code which looks like: Never mind I _finally_ get it. auto.c defines functions that are used the the #include files. So they have to be included after the definition in auto.c -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Another V2 question
And since I don't have prototypes (which makes inlining easier) those functions must be defined before they are used. Just curious now, how does the lack of prototypes make inlining easier? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
generic_dump_spd memory channel error
dump_spd_registers in generic_dump_spd.c isn't really so generic. It assumes that you have 2 memory channels which fails to build for me. Is there already some method of indicating how many memory channels you have our should I just create a #define option that you set when you need to use this diagnositc. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Dependency problem
Something is messed up with my dependencys. After I edit auto.c and do a make in my top level config directory. I get nothing to be done for 'all' after playing with it more I can go into the fallback direcory and delete all the .o's and .inc's and lots of other files but as long as I don't mess with ./fallback/linuxbios.rom it won't rebuild. I looked through the makefile and my INIT-OBJECTS is blank. But if this were really the case I don't see how I would be building a working image. Any ideas on what I should look at? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Another V2 question
It should be straight forward to remove all of the tests etc for switching from a fallback to a normal image. Do I really have to remove them? Ron seemed to suggest that if I just turn off the fallback suff then I will end up with only a singel fallback image. I was thinking of the per board test that make the policy decision which image you should be in. Ok so now I'm confused again. Perhaps we should just go through the gory details and I'll be sure to write it up in something for the next person. When HAVE_FALLBACK_BOOT=1 things do the normal fallback, check and jump to normal. This won't ever work fully on our board since the CMOS is not powered. When I set that to 0 whats going to happen in the resulting build and image runtime? I would prefer to stay as close to the framework you have already and just running fallback seems fine to me if thats all I need to do. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Another V2 question
Our product is going to go into Gasoline pumps. You would not believe the lengths that some store operators go to so they can cheat the consumer slightly per fillup. So our customer requires a flash update to be physical mod. I want to know more about their tricks. Is there any mod chip I can use to lower my fuel expense? As a consumer I think you are out of luck. Pump you gas on the coldest days when the liquid is the most dense..*grin* Actually I think all the newer pumps cal for temp as well. Perhaps I can add a special ollie backdoor. *grin* We don't do any of that software though. Just the hardware. Dishonest store ops will hire black hats to actually reverse engineer the boards and software that are in the dispenser and have them shave off some percentage of gas for each fill up so you think you pumped 14.9 gallons but you may have only gotten 14.8. One interesting case was a dispenser that would correctly pump for =5 gallons but skimp on you for larger amounts. Not coincidently the inspector that roams around and periodically checks these things used to use a special 5 gallon jug to test. So it would pass inspection but still cheat customers. This was discovered by accident. I guess the store changed hands and the dispenser had a problem and was returned back to the mfg complete with all the mods. The inspectors now use several different amounts that are changed frequently. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
auto.c questions
What's the functional purpose of auto.c? Obvously to turn on the ram but what else? Are the #includes distributed through the file for a romcc reason? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Another V2 question
Guess this means that I'll never come out of fallback? Of course I'm stll a long ways off from that now you can't really use fallback, I guess, unless you stash those bits somewhere else. Unless I wrote them to the flash there's nothing on my board that is persistent between boots. How is this handled on non-x86? Most of those dont have any cmos either. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: V2 questions
Whats the mapping between the various CPU models in the intel directory and marketing cpu names as I know them like Pentium III, P3 celeron, Pentuim 4, etc. At this point I believe the marketing names are going away as they are not specific enough, so you have to use the full name. That's about it. I still need to know the mapping. I don't see any of thie model stuff in my documentation. Granted there's a bunch of stuff I probally haven't looked at. I have a PIII celeron. Where do I go loook to find what model that is so I know what to add into my config? I don't completely grok the fallback and normal stuff. I know the theory but not practice. I know this is a FAQ. Explain it to me and I'll document it for the next guy. fallback always runs the first few instructions, and it makes a decision about whether to continue running or jump to normal. Well I was hoping for a bit more detail. *grin* Like how do you enable and disable it and what do all the options do. Why are all the payloads out of tree? Be nice if there was a payloads directory with some known good payloads. well, I am supposed to put my filo in there RSN, should I do that? My mistake ... Well when I got the build error I was unsure if you _had_ to have a payload specified and there weren't any. So I just created a blank file and tried that. I would still prefer to get people to build out of the tree, but ... Out of tree makes it a bit more difficult for me to keep all my stuff under one roof when I go to check it into my internal CVS. Why do you like out of tree? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: buildtarget error
I'll try adding in a northbridge framework and see what happens. you need to have at least one 'chip' I do. chip cpu/intel/socket_PGA370 end So you must have to have more than that. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: V2 questions
well, I am supposed to put my filo in there RSN, should I do that? My mistake ... What about fs_stream? What's fs_stream? some questions and compiles. But then again, packing a good documentation might help further. That's why I'm asking all these questions. I'm documenting as I go. I'll feed that back when I'm done. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: V2 questions
I have a PIII celeron. Where do I go loook to find what model that is so I know what to add into my config? That was a PGA370, right? I am guessing it is not in there, looking at the tree. Right. I created it. And really all it needs is the right cpu/intel/model_xxx in the config file. Currently I'm using model_6xx which is what the slot_2 used. Currently, it's always enabled, but if you build a fallback-only payload, then 'normal' won't get run. This is hokey, I know. So if I just remove all the normal stuff? What about all the reset16 and entry16 stuff? Looks to me like I pretty much have to re-write my MB config.lb Out of tree makes it a bit more difficult for me to keep all my stuff under one roof when I go to check it into my internal CVS. Why do you like out of tree? What I mean is, the .o and other objects out of the tree. Since you haven't really said specificlly what you don't like about in-tree builds I say what I do like. Having everything under one roof make it much easier for me to just take a snapshot of things. CVS is great but there are still loads of time when I'ts just more of a hassle. Sweet and simple. I can't tell you how many times I've had to go back to a snapshot and snag a binary that I wasn't able to reproduce due do some wierdness going on. Or just as a sanity check when wierdness is going on. Having things in seperate trees makes that harder. I do understand that having them differnt though does offer a lot of advantages in other areas. But I would say that what you really want is the ability to do it either way. My original point was though that it would be nice from a new board porters view if there was some kind of reference payload for each known good board and it was included. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: OT, Linuxbios usage...
I was just wondering if it's possible to use linuxbios as a kind of virtualisation machine, meaning that I could use linuxbios to snoop windows drivers for register hunting (to get real 3D-gfx-support for instance)? This means that windows would run as a virtual os. Not really. LinuxBIOS is pretty much for booting live hardware. What I think you wan't is the bochs project, VMware or Win4lin. http://bochs.sourceforge.net/ -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
what cpu models are tested?
cpu model_6xx will not build. microcode_MU16930c.h: No such file or directory. I'll play with some others. Also if you forget to provide enough arguments to romcc you get an 'Invalid tolken' error. A nice enhancement would be to count arguments and if they don't match then give a incorrect number of arguments error. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: buildtarget error
Looks like you have to have a pci_domain just adding a northbridge didn't fix it. So now I'm at chip northbridge/intel/440bx device pci_domain 0 on end chip cpu/intel/socket_PGA370 end end I noticed that I also have 4 irq slots specified. So pci slots with no pci_domain. Perhaps thats what was tripping up buildtarget? Does IRQ_SLOT_COUNT have to match how many actual slots are on the MB or just the number of pci devices in total? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: OT, Linuxbios usage...
fullfilled (hardware setup loading of os). A virtualisation machine much like vmware or bochs, except that this machine would let the operating run on the hardware instead of emulating the hardware (am I making sense?). So you mean some sort of HAL like the VM on a IBM370 does. Possible but linuxBIOS is a _long_ way from that. And it's not really compatible with its overall goal which is to get the hardware up enough that a linux kernel can take over. Load a payload into ram and jump to that. The qemu is a target in V2 if you start working with that you may be able to do what you want. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: buildtarget error
Does IRQ_SLOT_COUNT have to match how many actual slots are on the MB or just the number of pci devices in total? Basically one for each device and one for bus1. Otherwise Linux won't see the APIC of the 8111. So the number of devices as counted by lspci? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: what cpu models are tested?
A typo in the header file include name. It should be microcode_MU16830c.h I just committed the fix. ok. Thanks I'll update and retry. Which is roughly cpufamily, cpumodel, stepping as reported by /proc/cpuinfo. With various bits ignored as seems appropriate. Ah. Good. That makes it easier. Patches to romcc are welcome. *grin* I'm not worthy. My hunch in this case is that you had an undefined macro but without the error message I can't guess. No. I failed to note that the early_serial function took arguments. I was calling it with (). The epia uses enable_vt8231_serial() But my my port of the pc87351 modeled after the pc87360 used pc87351_enable_serial(arg ,1 arg 2) and when I modified the the epia code for my MB I fogot to fill in the arguments. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Another V2 question
:) Do you have any other non-volatile storage? Nope. A serial eeprom might be another good choice, of a location for variables. Anyway I understand the reasons for it and will happily work on brainstorming By design if you want to change the boot firmware of our device (in production) you will have to de-solder the flash. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: buildtarget error
You should have one per pci slot, as well.. but those should only be there if something is in the pci slot.. We really need dynamic table creation for that. But all in all, 1 per device in lspci is about right I only have one slot (and only if its loaded) I have many devices soldered onto the board. Eventually perhaps I'll break you guys of this commercial motherboard only mentality. *joke* *grin* My question was more along the lines of a device like the south bridge has many devices in that so does each device in there count or just ones that need a PIRQ? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: buildtarget error
even simpler, it really is (unless I've gone nuts) just ones you want to put in the table. Note that is slightly different from your statements above. Ok That narrows it down then. So if you want an IRQ routed to it then it needs to be counted. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: V2 questions
no, not at all. It's the target/bitworks/richard/Config.lb that determines normal/fallback or fallback-only configuration, and that in turn will drive how the thing gets built Ok. I think I see now that I've looked a bit more closely. So if I set the HAVE_FALLBACK to 0 then it will only build the fallback image but include everything that would have been in the normal image? good point. The only reason I like seperate trees is that if things get too weird I like to rm -rf freebios cvs blah blah co freebios and not affect any of my targets. That's all. Thats a good point as well. I usually find though that when things get flaky. I've always been under the hood working on things. So blowing away my tree would blow away any changes I've been working on. Plus I can simulate what you are talking about by just checking out a clean copy into another directory and building that. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: kudos to the V2 coders
Starting as a complete V2 newbie, in less than 9 hours of work and on the _very_ first successful compile, LinuxBIOS V2 produced serial code output on our IMS board! well, you made our day. I'm happy it worked. Uh, FAQ? :-) In progress. I'm documenting as I go. Thats why all the barrage of questions -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Another V2 question
Ok so by design you really only want a single firmware image. Right.. I think Ron has me fixed up. I was unaware that there was an overall flag that enabled/disabled the fallback system. It should be straight forward to remove all of the tests etc for switching from a fallback to a normal image. Do I really have to remove them? Ron seemed to suggest that if I just turn off the fallback suff then I will end up with only a singel fallback image. For those of us who have field upgradable systems it makes a bigger difference. Yeah I would say so... Since you guys have the power to render 1000 paperweights with a single command. Our product is going to go into Gasoline pumps. You would not believe the lengths that some store operators go to so they can cheat the consumer slightly per fillup. So our customer requires a flash update to be physical mod. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
what cpu model is a PIII?
I'm trying to setup my /cpu/intel/socket_PGA370 directory. What cpu model should I use? -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
buildtarget error
Ok so slowly I'm trying to move to V2. Step 1 was to just try and get some serial action going. I added my CPU and superIO and setup my mainboard directory with a simple config file. I've got a traceback on buildtarget though. So aparently I'm not filling out everything that needs to be filled. My config is really simple with no northbridges or southbridges. Just a cpu. All I want to try to do right now is get the early serial port up. Attached is my mainboard config.lb and options.lb and the output from buildtarget. Perhaps there are some additional debug flags I can turn on for more info? -- Richard A. Smith buildtarget_error Description: Binary data Config.lb Description: Binary data Options.lb Description: Binary data
V2 questions
I'm starting up the learning curve Whats the mapping between the various CPU models in the intel directory and marketing cpu names as I know them like Pentium III, P3 celeron, Pentuim 4, etc. I don't completely grok the fallback and normal stuff. I know the theory but not practice. I know this is a FAQ. Explain it to me and I'll document it for the next guy. Why are all the payloads out of tree? Be nice if there was a payloads directory with some known good payloads. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: v2 testbios compile error
It is used because it is in FC2. I believe it is in recent SuSe too. I think it is requred for x86_64. I changed it to be configurable in the Makefile. Just enter your libpci version there and it will compile. Unfortunately there is no simple way I didn't see that in V2 makefile I was using. All it had was a hardcoded path /usr/lib/libpci.a Both the #include statements in the .c files and the path to the library had to be changed. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Overlaping IO resource for AMD K8
It is weird that fuctory bios can still use them. There's gotta be a hack in fuctory bios, I would guess, something like: if (the pci card is a vga there is an option rom) callit(); i.e. I betcha that fuctory bioses will call an option rom on vga even if it violates the spec. I wonder if we really want to do this, the S3 cards are antiques anyway. Ollie how are you ripping the vbios bios from the S3 card? Did you pop the chip and use a programmer? If not you may be suffering from the nuke the rom header issue I was talking about earlier. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: v2 testbios compile error
Do cvs update. The path is still hardcoded. Both the #include statements in the .c files and the path to the library had to be changed. Why did you have to change the #include statements?!? The include is linux/pci so it will grab my system copy of the headers.. I can't update the system copy of the headers since it breaks everything else that uses those headers. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
Re: Overlaping IO resource for AMD K8
i.e. I betcha that fuctory bioses will call an option rom on vga even if it violates the spec. I doubt that.. I've scrubbed the 0xAA55 from several VGA cards so I could plug them into a factory bios system and not have the VGA enabled. None of them ever went ahead and ran the bios. I can enable rom load but disable execution in LinuxBIOS. After the system is up, I dumped the memory content. Actually, the rom load refuse to download it because its header is incorrect. It is not the nuke problem, it is simply incorrect header. Without a correct header I don't see how it could have ever worked in a factory system. I have several S3 cards and they don't seem broken to me. -- Richard A. Smith ___ Linuxbios mailing list Linuxbios@clustermatic.org http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
