[coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-02-01 Thread Patrick Georgi
The cmos.default code wasn't actually used so far, due to an oversight when forward-porting this feature from an old branch. - Extend walkcbfs' use by factoring out the stage handling into C code. - New sanitize_cmos() function that looks if CMOS data is invalid and cmos.default exists and if s

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-02-17 Thread Georgi, Patrick
On Di, 2011-02-01 at 11:50 +0100, Patrick Georgi wrote: > The cmos.default code wasn't actually used so far, due to an oversight > when forward-porting this feature from an old branch. ping? -- Patrick Georgi SINA-Development - High Security secunet Security Networks AG - Mergenthalerallee 77 - 65

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-02-17 Thread Peter Stuge
Patrick Georgi wrote: > > The cmos.default code wasn't actually used so far, due to an oversight > when forward-porting this feature from an old branch. > > - Extend walkcbfs' use by factoring out the stage handling into C code. > - New sanitize_cmos() function that looks if CMOS data is invalid

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-02-17 Thread Georgi, Patrick
Am Freitag, den 18.02.2011, 03:55 +0100 schrieb Peter Stuge: > Patrick Georgi wrote: > > > > The cmos.default code wasn't actually used so far, due to an oversight > > when forward-porting this feature from an old branch. > > > > - Extend walkcbfs' use by factoring out the stage handling into C c

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-02-18 Thread Peter Stuge
Georgi, Patrick wrote: > > Is there a Kconfig option for enabling the NVRAM write? I would like > > that very much. I'd also like it to be off by default. > > HAVE_CMOS_DEFAULT. Without this, cmos.default isn't put into CBFS > (by default), and without that file, no write happens. But it's a main

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-02-18 Thread Georgi, Patrick
Am Freitag, den 18.02.2011, 12:15 +0100 schrieb Peter Stuge: > > HAVE_CMOS_DEFAULT. Without this, cmos.default isn't put into CBFS > > (by default), and without that file, no write happens. > But it's a mainboard knob, not a user knob, right? We don't deliver cmos.default files, so this is a user s

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-03-03 Thread Georgi, Patrick
Am Freitag, den 18.02.2011, 12:28 +0100 schrieb Georgi, Patrick: > Am Freitag, den 18.02.2011, 12:15 +0100 schrieb Peter Stuge: > > > HAVE_CMOS_DEFAULT. Without this, cmos.default isn't put into CBFS > > > (by default), and without that file, no write happens. > > But it's a mainboard knob, not a u

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-03-04 Thread Stefan Reinauer
On 2/1/11 2:50 AM, Patrick Georgi wrote: The cmos.default code wasn't actually used so far, due to an oversight when forward-porting this feature from an old branch. - Extend walkcbfs' use by factoring out the stage handling into C code. - New sanitize_cmos() function that looks if CMOS data is

Re: [coreboot] [PATCH] Move cmos.default handling to bootblock

2011-03-04 Thread Patrick Georgi
Am 04.03.2011 09:32, schrieb Stefan Reinauer: >> index 895a185..a808cec 100644 >> --- a/src/arch/x86/include/bootblock_common.h >> +++ b/src/arch/x86/include/bootblock_common.h >> @@ -17,17 +17,45 @@ static void bootblock_northbridge_init(void) { } >> static void bootblock_southbridge_init(void) {