Hi Ronald, On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 04:29:57PM +0100, Ronald Hoogenboom wrote: > On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 20:11 -0500, Ward Vandewege wrote: > > Uhm - at this point I really want to know what hardware you have. Is this an > > SPI version of the m57sli? I've got several m57sli boards in production > > (both > > PLCC and SPI versions) that work just fine with coreboot. > > I've got a m57sli rev.2.0 board (SPI) with Athlon64-X2 5600+ > (winchester), 2GB RAM (2x1G), SATA2 hard disk and nvidia GeForce 8600 GT > 256MB. I'm using coreboot v2 svn rev. 3100. > > I've fitted a second SPI flash SST25VF016B (2MB) on the second land > pattern and installed a spdt switch on the CE pins.
Nice! I've added a soic socket on the second pad of one of our SPI boards. I also bought SST25VF016B chips because they were the only 2+MB ones I could source here. > I've modified the rom_stream to do pio mode read, because the lower > 1.5MB of the flash is not readable memory mapped (thanks to the it8716f > superio). (see the previous email thread about the SST25VF016B on > m57sli) I'll post a patch when all is working here. Looking forward to that patch :) > I've created an elf image from the normal kernel I also use when booting > with the proprietary bios and compressed it with lzma to make it fit in > the flash. > > The elfboot loads the image just fine, as far as I can see. Kernel > starts, but there are problems with VGA (rom signature wrong) and SATA > (irq routed wrong). I think that this last could be related with the > 'noapic' kernel parameter, as the SATA irqs are 20, 23 and 21 (see > mptable.c). It also seems that the ACPI is still not working properly, > but that's for later. > > Do you also use the 'noapic' parameter (like suggested in the tutorial)? Well, here's the thing. On the PLCC version of the board as of kernel 2.6.22.1 (stock kernel.org release) I need noapic *only* with the proprietary bios, not with coreboot. > As a general rule, should the io, memory and irq mapping for the devices > be the same as when booted proprietary? If not, should this be reason > for concern and/or change? Good question. I'm sure others can answer it - I'm not sure. Seems like irq mapping would have to be correct, but I'm far from an export on this stuff. Thanks, Ward. -- Ward Vandewege <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Free Software Foundation - Senior System Administrator -- coreboot mailing list [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
