On 18/10/08 00:28 +0200, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > On 17.10.2008 23:57, Myles Watson wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > On 17.10.2008 19:46, Jordan Crouse wrote: > > > On 17/10/08 11:29 -0600, Myles Watson wrote: > > > > > >> I haven't looked into the cause yet, but the boot log looks a > > little "funny" > > >> in coreinfo. At least it's smiling. > > >> > > > > > > Hmm - that is very unfortunate. I think we have boot log issues > > - I have > > > also discovered that the bootlog is apparently overwriting the v3 > > > coreboot tables. This could be a consequence of that. > > > > > > > Is there any old version where you don't see the issues on qemu? > > > > > > Yes. I know when it was a new feature I tried it out and didn't see > > this garbage. > > I remember it working well some time ago. It would be great if you could > do a binary search and narrow it down. I can then fix the problem.
I don't ever remember it working exactly right. If you look at the output, it matches what ever is living at physical address 0x0 - at least for the first page or so. Clearly there is come contention here. Jordan -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
