Re: [coreboot] coreboot on amd g34 platforms

2011-02-22 Thread Alexandr Frolov
Alex G. пишет: On 02/21/2011 07:07 PM, Alexandr Frolov wrote: Hello all, Is there any activities to support coreboot for AMD G34 motherboards? Not that I know of, but the chipset should be theoretically supported. You'd have to check the source tree and the datasheet to see if the

[coreboot] [PATCH] Add .text into romstage sections.

2011-02-22 Thread Bao, Zheng
The text sections in *.romstage.o are called .text instead of .rom.text. The .text can be built in, but the _erom cannot be calculated correctly without this patch. Nobody uses _erom currently, so nobody seems cares it. Signed-off-by: Zheng Bao zheng@amd.com Index:

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH 3/3] Move coreboot specific rules and setup to toplevel Makefile.inc

2011-02-22 Thread Georgi, Patrick
Am Donnerstag, den 17.02.2011, 20:05 +0100 schrieb Stefan Reinauer: I agree we want this, though. Can you please put Makefile.inc in src/? We currently have subdirs-y = ... util/cbfstool in there. That would be ++ugly with src/Makefile.inc. However we could move the src/* related things and the

Re: [coreboot] [RFC] serial initialization of non-console ports

2011-02-22 Thread Georgi, Patrick
Am Donnerstag, den 17.02.2011, 22:56 +0100 schrieb Stefan Reinauer: So I suggest to wipe the init_uart8250 from the SuperIO drivers completely, leaving us with simpler and cleaner console handling code and one less WTF when reading the code. Sounds good. Any reasons not to wipe serial port

[coreboot] build service results for r6375

2011-02-22 Thread repository service
Dear coreboot readers! This is the automatic build system of coreboot. The developer oxygene checked in revision 6375 to the coreboot repository. This caused the following changes: Change Log: Move coreboot specific rules and setup to toplevel Makefile.inc KERNELVERSION issue found by Stefan

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Add .text into romstage sections.

2011-02-22 Thread Marc Jones
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 4:24 AM, Bao, Zheng zheng@amd.com wrote: The text sections in *.romstage.o are called .text instead of .rom.text. The .text can be built in, but the _erom cannot be calculated correctly without this patch. Nobody uses _erom currently, so nobody seems cares it.

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] disabling microcode update

2011-02-22 Thread xdrudis
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 08:44:35AM -0600, Scott Duplichan wrote: This really isn't relevant, but microcode patch source code certainly exists, as does source code for the main microcode that the patch modifies. A microcode assembler converts the source code into binary form. I think it's

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] disabling microcode update

2011-02-22 Thread Alex G.
On 02/22/2011 02:47 AM, Peter Stuge wrote: Xavi Drudis Ferran wrote: Does everyone prefer to have it not include update_microcode.c and change romstage.c in those boards that call update_microcode(...) ? At least I like this better. It makes it clear what effect this option has for

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Add .text into romstage sections.

2011-02-22 Thread Bao, Zheng
The ldscript_fallback_cbfs.lb is only for the romstage. It does nothing to change the building of ramstage. And it doesn't have area like .data, which can be read and wrote. From the attached build output, we can see that only crt0.romstage.o changes .rodata to rom.data, changes .text to