-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On 05/17/2018 06:20 PM, Banik, Subrata wrote: Hi Subrata, >>> FSP2.0, I'm following Librem Purism options since they seem to >>> boot the same SoC. They use KabyLake FSP obtained by >>> get_blobss.sh [1], if you think this is incorrect then I would >>> like to know why, because it may mean that Pursim code is also >>> incorrect from Intel point of view. > SKL won't be compatible with KBL FSP. Please don’t try to use KBL > FSP and mix match with SKL Coreboot. No one tested that > combination. You saw my boot log, so what coreboot platform would be good reference for my development? BTW last SKL FSP commit was almost 2 years ago. @Youness, I would be glad to know what is Purims take on that. According to above message usage of KBL FSP is wrong approach for i7-6500. Maybe I'm reading/using get_blobs incorrectly? Best Regards, - -- Piotr Król Embedded Systems Consultant https://3mdeb.com | @3mdeb_com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE4DCbLYWmfoRjKeNLsu5x6WeqnkwFAlr+2MIACgkQsu5x6Weq nkyEDw//b22uIdIB1kOJ4PcskG5MENENbYs/yTSoGqd21Lz0smbjSi/SeYejngcX 8cScWDTDgrxmOLHcV2SJbheTI/tj1YX1Y00iScDADMk/s1PaJUMyPpcaP2oKXuga V+gXIJdtaH79K6H013PVb8s0DbU3BHcrO8gOZEAq+IsrTrXgoQ5HAk5XOEyAHtOc NdVLpg4bjjh6WqK/RXZlOXs3B7K3zkl6e9W0OPD98mH/qd7bX/DRA/zwSyqqx0g1 jZ0qkynsCXJHaWswOsUYyjAjizAFIdkCbDLYkWMqirveC+6ZtDKhqA3uLl4zqmRU KZxKf13HkVvBHa2V7kbVV87cBQ3/pI+NdTt1to/rvZQNv/dViqG8sK4mo5ymSTNZ 1QiNk9MtGnwiRSTSaXzq+4vSjyic4g9ezMjiLY78skAXTb9sevxjW95hYEKdS/MY P/4JjVsqn+Jp+YrIDIXShbC+cgjlCM5YWZ1rJQ3gw0/9qUJyRSa9kZfsKA3Qyv+j vt/v7G6yZTQdzMyYaZNoSB3lWsRwPa1Jmt5dcO13OsE9f3uP8ivLldtjCWnvVHKD ZnwyetKMJweS5FWdvx6Kc2I9bFBzMtYzeEDIEMSqqcNNHmY+n3OvWjoR2+dl+RjZ 9U9ZxuQro+29lyIx/jKKMQFV1lSH2XcostBCEKXyraxUH988Cqk= =Soqa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
