On 16.06.2008 19:02, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > >> On 14.06.2008 21:53, Stefan Reinauer wrote: >> >>> I suggest using the same mechanism, wrapping the information in a lar >>> header, making it a single file lar. The lar format can handle this, and >>> we don't have to worry for different versions. >>> >>> >>> >> How about a generic bootblock/VPD signature instead? Having a short >> signature in the top 256 bytes or so will allow recognition of complete >> and incomplete (only partly mapped) coreboot images easily. >> >> Proposal for signature formats: >> >> 4 bytes: >> "CB20" for v2.0 and "CB30" for v3.0 >> >> 8 bytes (option 1): >> "CB203300" for v2.0, rev 3300 >> >> 8 bytes (option 2): >> "coreboot" >> >> 16 bytes: >> "coreboot20r3300 " for v2.0, r3300 (note the space at the end for >> 5-digit svn revisions) >> >> > > Top 256 bytes will not always work. The current trouble is due to the > fact that we have some mainboards that need the information in a > different place than others. >
Anything in the top 4k would be OK for me, unless there are specific reasons this is impossible with some boards. I'd appreciate a pointer about the "different place" thing. > Other than that, we might indeed put the coreboot version into the > firmware signature, too, if there's a reason to do so. Is there? > Not sure about svn revision, but differentiating between v2 and v3 would help. For one, we could keep a pseudo-LAR out of v2. > I miss the actual information in your suggestion, namely the mainboard > vendor and type. > Placing vendor and type somewhere else is possible, as long as flashrom knows that it should look there. > Since we already have LAR, using that format instead of yet another > signature rule makes a lot of sense in my opinion. > For v3, yes mostly. For v2, someone would have to add a invalid LAR pseudoheader to the final linked image. Definitely not something I'd like to try (my linker script skills are not good enough nor do I consider this to be a particularly compelling idea). Regards, Carl-Daniel -- coreboot mailing list [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
