[coreboot] [PATCH] fix option table race (this time for real)

2010-09-24 Thread Stefan Reinauer
See patch Second try: - Fix race condition in option_table.h generation by moving the include statement to those files that actually need it. This significantly reduces the number of dependencies, so it's no longer extremely ugly to specify them manually (see the src/pc80/Makefile.inc

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH EHCI Debug Port setup for all AMD SB600/SB700 boards

2010-09-24 Thread Stefan Reinauer
On 9/23/10 11:39 PM, Peter Stuge wrote: +#if CONFIG_USBDEBUG +#include southbridge/amd/sb700/sb700_enable_usbdebug.c +#include pc80/usbdebug_serial.c +#endif Can this go somewhere outside the mainboard directory? If anything does need to go in the mainboard dir now, then would it be

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH EHCI Debug Port setup for all AMD SB600/SB700 boards

2010-09-24 Thread Stefan Reinauer
On 9/23/10 11:09 PM, Uwe Hermann wrote: For now I marked all chipsets where we have Debug Port code as untested, I have a feeling the functionality was rarely tested recently (or at all) so we should only mark those chipsets as tested where we actually have recent test reports. Last time I

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] fix option table race (this time for real)

2010-09-24 Thread Myles Watson
Thanks for fixing it! Acked-by: Myles Watson myle...@gmail.com I think it would be nice to keep the mc146818rtc.h include close to the option table include where possible. I did it for a few boards to see what you thought. It also removes a stray space. Signed-off-by: Myles Watson

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH EHCI Debug Port setup for all AMD SB600/SB700 boards

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Stefan Reinauer wrote: I'm thinking that maybe sb700_enable_usbdebug.c could be pulled in when both SOUTHBRIDGE_AMD_SB700 and CONFIG_USBDEBUG are selected? We could do a lot of such or similar improvements if we started not including code but adding it to an object list. Would it actually

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH EHCI Debug Port setup for all AMD SB600/SB700 boards

2010-09-24 Thread ron minnich
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Stefan Reinauer stefan.reina...@coresystems.de wrote: We could do a lot of such or similar improvements if we started not including code but adding it to an object list. Who's gonna do it? First you have to stop using romcc, right? Or is this one of those

[coreboot] [commit] r5831 - in trunk/src: mainboard/hp mainboard/hp/dl165_g6_fam10 superio/serverengines/pilot

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Author: oxygene Date: Fri Sep 24 19:35:32 2010 New Revision: 5831 URL: https://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/5831 Log: Add support for HP DL165-G6 with Fam10 CPU. Original patch was Signed-off-by: Arne Georg Gleditsch arne.gledit...@numascale.com Updates to accomodate changes in

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]some more bus entry in mptables derived from device tree

2010-09-24 Thread Patrick Georgi
Am 24.08.2010 22:34, schrieb Patrick Georgi: Hi, attached patch derives coreboot create bus data in the mptable automatically from the device tree for a couple more boards. It's build tested, but not run tested. Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi patrick.geo...@coresystems.de ping? --

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]some more bus entry in mptables derived from device tree

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: attached patch derives coreboot create bus data in the mptable automatically from the device tree for a couple more boards. It's build tested, but not run tested. Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi patrick.geo...@coresystems.de Acked-by: Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se --

[coreboot] build service results for r5831

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Dear coreboot readers! This is the automatic build system of coreboot. The developer oxygene checked in revision 5831 to the coreboot repository. This caused the following changes: Change Log: Add support for HP DL165-G6 with Fam10 CPU. Original patch was Signed-off-by: Arne Georg Gleditsch

[coreboot] [commit] r5832 - trunk/src/mainboard/hp/dl165_g6_fam10

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Author: oxygene Date: Fri Sep 24 20:12:46 2010 New Revision: 5832 URL: https://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/5832 Log: Fix hp/dl165_g6_fam10 build. Failed to take r5800 and another recent change into account. Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi patrick.geo...@coresystems.de Acked-by:

[coreboot] [commit] r5833 - in trunk/src: mainboard/amd/dbm690t mainboard/amd/mahogany mainboard/amd/mahogany_fam10 mainboard/amd/pistachio mainboard/amd/tilapia_fam10 mainboard/asrock/939a785gmh main

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Author: uwe Date: Fri Sep 24 20:18:20 2010 New Revision: 5833 URL: https://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/5833 Log: Hook up all AMD SB600/SB700 boards to the EHCI Debug Port infrastructure. Without a (currently) dummy set_debug_port() function the build fails, this may or may not

Re: [coreboot] [commit] r5832 - trunk/src/mainboard/hp/dl165_g6_fam10

2010-09-24 Thread Myles Watson
Modified: trunk/src/mainboard/hp/dl165_g6_fam10/Kconfig == --- trunk/src/mainboard/hp/dl165_g6_fam10/Kconfig       Fri Sep 24 19:35:32 2010        (r5831) +++ trunk/src/mainboard/hp/dl165_g6_fam10/Kconfig       Fri

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH EHCI Debug Port setup for all AMD SB600/SB700 boards

2010-09-24 Thread Uwe Hermann
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 05:43:57PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote: On 9/23/10 11:09 PM, Uwe Hermann wrote: For now I marked all chipsets where we have Debug Port code as untested, I have a feeling the functionality was rarely tested recently (or at all) so we should only mark those chipsets

[coreboot] [commit] r5834 - trunk/src/mainboard/hp/dl165_g6_fam10

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Author: oxygene Date: Fri Sep 24 20:28:50 2010 New Revision: 5834 URL: https://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/5834 Log: Undo stupid mistake in r5832 Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi patrick.geo...@coresystems.de Acked-by: Patrick Georgi patrick.geo...@coresystems.de Modified:

[coreboot] build service results for r5832

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Dear coreboot readers! This is the automatic build system of coreboot. The developer oxygene checked in revision 5832 to the coreboot repository. This caused the following changes: Change Log: Fix hp/dl165_g6_fam10 build. Failed to take r5800 and another recent change into account.

Re: [coreboot] [commit] r5832 - trunk/src/mainboard/hp/dl165_g6_fam10

2010-09-24 Thread Patrick Georgi
Am 24.09.2010 20:19, schrieb Myles Watson: +#include southbridge/broadcom/bcm5785/bcm5785_enable_rom.c This broke it again. That was an issue I had in my local tree - with local changes to the southbridge that I wasn't aware of anymore. Fixed in r5834. Thanks, Patrick -- coreboot mailing

[coreboot] [commit] r5835 - in trunk/src/mainboard: tyan/s2735 tyan/s2850 tyan/s2875 tyan/s2880 tyan/s4880 tyan/s4882 via/epia-n via/pc2500e via/vt8454c

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Author: oxygene Date: Fri Sep 24 20:42:56 2010 New Revision: 5835 URL: https://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/5835 Log: Automatically fetch bus information for mptable from the device tree, instead of using hardcoded values. If this changes behaviour, this is either - a bug in

[coreboot] build service results for r5833

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Dear coreboot readers! This is the automatic build system of coreboot. The developer uwe checked in revision 5833 to the coreboot repository. This caused the following changes: Change Log: Hook up all AMD SB600/SB700 boards to the EHCI Debug Port infrastructure. Without a (currently) dummy

[coreboot] build service results for r5834

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Dear coreboot readers! This is the automatic build system of coreboot. The developer oxygene checked in revision 5834 to the coreboot repository. This caused the following changes: Change Log: Undo stupid mistake in r5832 Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi patrick.geo...@coresystems.de Acked-by:

[coreboot] [PATCH]Improve ccache handling

2010-09-24 Thread Patrick Georgi
Hi, attached patch improves ccache handling (and requires ccache 3.1 to work properly, at least in my tests). coreboot file names are now normalized to the base directory before hashing, allowing multiple trees to share the same cache more efficiently. This will greatly benefit the build bot.

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Improve ccache handling

2010-09-24 Thread Myles Watson
I also found that we might be able to use __DATE__ and __TIME__ (preprocessor macros) instead of calling date(1). Any opinion on that? I have a mild preference for macros over system calls. Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi patrick.geo...@coresystems.de Acked-by: Myles Watson myle...@gmail.com

[coreboot] FrontRunner and OLPC memory type?

2010-09-24 Thread Nils
Hi all, As i finally had a little time to spend on Coreboot i was able to almost finish a patch for Coreboot to autodetect DRAM on the GX2 chipset. I still have one problem that i could use some help with. As the Lippert FrontRunner ,the OLPC btest and the OLPC rev_a seem to have onboard DRAM

Re: [coreboot] FrontRunner and OLPC memory type?

2010-09-24 Thread ron minnich
The OLPC question is a little tricky. I have several btest boards and ... the dram on each one is different, with different timings. Two of them have custom dram timing settings (it's a long story). This target is going on 5 years old and I think it ought to be yanked -- anyone have one? It's a

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Improve ccache handling

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: attached patch improves ccache handling (and requires ccache 3.1 to work properly, at least in my tests). .. I also found that we might be able to use __DATE__ and __TIME__ (preprocessor macros) instead of calling date(1). Any opinion on that? Go for it!

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: attached patch uses the __DATE__ and __TIME__ macros instead of date(1) calls. User visible results are: - different date format (no timezone included) Ok. - different time stamps in a single build Hm, but there's only one build.h, right? //Peter -- coreboot

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: - different time stamps in a single build Hm, but there's only one build.h, right? It's evaluated on compile time, not when build.h is generated. DOH! Yes of course. :) Is it too ugly to add a compile step to expand the macro into build.h ? //Peter -- coreboot

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH]Use __DATE__ and __TIME__ instead of date(1)

2010-09-24 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: Am 25.09.2010 00:56, schrieb Peter Stuge: DOH! Yes of course. :) Is it too ugly to add a compile step to expand the macro into build.h ? While keeping all the macros that are in build.h alive? Yes. And it is the same as the previous date command I guess.. Too ugly

[coreboot] [commit] r5837 - in trunk/src/southbridge/amd: rs690 rs780 sb600 sb700

2010-09-24 Thread repository service
Author: uwe Date: Sat Sep 25 01:37:25 2010 New Revision: 5837 URL: https://tracker.coreboot.org/trac/coreboot/changeset/5837 Log: Make SB600/SB700 more similar for easier diffs (trivial). Also fixes random whitespace issues, typos, etc. Signed-off-by: Uwe Hermann u...@hermann-uwe.de Acked-by: