On 02/19/2015 10:44 PM, c...@post1.dansknet.dk wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to run coreboot on my MSI MS-7250 (K9N SLI) mainboard. This
board is apparently quite similar to the MSI MS-7260 (K9N Neo) which is
already supported:
http://www.coreboot.org/Board:msi/ms7260
Hi
I don't have experience with
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger <
c-d.hailfinger.devel.2...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am currently planning to set up a test system with 5 (later up to 10)
> machines boot testing each new coreboot commit. This test system will be
> serviced (i.e. recovery from bricking)
Hi,
I'd like to run coreboot on my MSI MS-7250 (K9N SLI) mainboard. This
board is apparently quite similar to the MSI MS-7260 (K9N Neo) which is
already supported:
http://www.coreboot.org/Board:msi/ms7260
This is what my board looks like, though mine is a version 2.2:
http://www.msi.com/pro
Julius Werner wrote:
> > We maybe can expand it to have informations like time-out or
> > retry count for a given segment.
>
> One word of caution I'd like to add here is that making this API more
> complex/powerful requires significant effort, now and in the future.
Not if the architecture is an
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Werner Zeh wrote:
> OK, forget my last Mail...I was to blind to see the truth :-)
> We already have my approach with the new interface.
>
> We maybe can expand it to have informations like time-out or retry count for
> a given segment.
One word of caution I'd li
2015-02-19 17:22 GMT+01:00 Kevin O'Connor :
> It would be a bit of work to get the software working and packaged
> nicely - but if it was, I think it could enable many more users to
> participate in automated tests and remote development.
That already was the hope of many coreboot related automated
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:35:11PM +0100, Patrick Georgi via coreboot wrote:
> 2015-02-19 0:14 GMT+01:00 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
> :
> > I am currently planning to set up a test system with 5 (later up to 10)
> > machines boot testing each new coreboot commit. This test system will be
> > serviced (
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:26:21PM +0100, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> * Timothy Pearson [150205 19:23]:
> > e820: BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
> > BIOS-e820: [mem 0x-0x0009fbff] usable
> > BIOS-e820: [mem 0x0009fc00-0x0009] reserved
> > BIOS-e820: [mem 0
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 03:59:27PM +0300, Kuzmichev Viktor wrote:
> Thank you very much, this helped a lot! Now memtest is loading and it
> successfully performs RAM tests.
> But there is another issue. Somehow, input via serial console does not work.
> And it seems like the problem is not in memte
On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 08:32:40AM +0100, Matthias Apitz wrote:
> El día Sunday, February 08, 2015 a las 11:14:10PM +0100, Idwer Vollering
> escribió:
> > 2015-02-08 21:55 GMT+01:00 Matthias Apitz :
> > > El día Sunday, February 08, 2015 a las 02:40:45PM -0600, Alex G. escribió:
> > >
> > >> Suspe
2015-02-19 0:14 GMT+01:00 Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
:
> I am currently planning to set up a test system with 5 (later up to 10)
> machines boot testing each new coreboot commit. This test system will be
> serviced (i.e. recovery from bricking) Mo-Fr during CET/CEST office hours.
>
> Current goals for
Werner Zeh wrote:
> We already have my approach with the new interface.
>
> We maybe can expand it to have informations like time-out or retry
> count for a given segment.
I think this is a really good idea.
I also think that this structure applies to SPI as well.
//Peter
--
coreboot mailing
OK, forget my last Mail...I was to blind to see the truth :-)
We already have my approach with the new interface.
We maybe can expand it to have informations like time-out or retry count for a
given segment.
Werner
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. Februar 2015 um 07:41 Uhr
> Von: "Werner Zeh"
> An:
13 matches
Mail list logo
