[coreboot] ASUS KGPE-D16 PCI-e lane bifurcation

[U'll Be King Of The Stars]

Hi all,

I'm considering adding two M.2 22110 NVMe x4 SSD's in software RAID1 to
a D16 using one dual-M.2 adapter card.  Most likely it would go in an x8
slot, I guess.

Does the D16 with blobless coreboot support simple PCI-e lane
bifurcation (x8 = x4 + x4)?

Or do I need an adapter card that has a PLX switch?  Thanks!

Kind regards,

Andrew
-- 
OpenPGP key: EB28 0338 28B7 19DA DAB0  B193 D21D 996E 883B E5B9



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

[coreboot] Re: Fwd: Re: Starting the coreboot 4.10 release process

[R S]

I saw somewhere on Mastodon that the foss collaborative piratepads will be
closed this week. Are you guys affected? Where are you moving?

On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:21 PM Matt B  wrote:

>
>
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Matt B 
> Date: Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [coreboot] Re: Starting the coreboot 4.10 release process
> To: Mike Banon 
>
>
> On a side note, when more than one option is possible, it's good to know
> which the tester used.
>
> Hypothetical example: did someone test the X230 with a vgabios blob or
> with libgfxinit?
> If unspecified, or if the default is the vgabiosblob (or nothing at all,
> as above) then who knows if libgfxinit works?
>
> -Matt
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:21 PM Mike Banon  wrote:
>
>> Okay, I returned your boards but added a note that "no board_status
>> report yet". Hopefully you could submit them in the near future, at
>> least for the archival purposes. And there's a similar question to
>> someone else who added "Asus P8H61-M Pro" despite that the latest
>> report for it is one year ago.
>> > The default config should always be a known good config, unless the
>> > board isn't well maintained. Needing a specific "good config" is a
>> > sign of unattended bugs.
>> Not necessarily: it could be that a default config is bootable for
>> some board but still somehow inferior. For example, it may boot but
>> without showing anything on a display, because no VGABIOS specified or
>> provided. Or i.e. it may be hard to convince the people to enable some
>> config by default despite it being useful, e.g. a coreinfo secondary
>> payload. So board_status report is a great way to promote your nice
>> config, and hopefully the people would share them more
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 5:28 PM Matt DeVillier 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I added those devices, all of which I have in my possession and were
>> tested over the weekend with TOT. I'd not yet had a chance to upload board
>> status for them, but figured knowing a good range of platforms/boards were
>> known working just prior to release was useful (and the purpose of the list)
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 9:14 AM Mike Banon  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Just noticed that someone included i.e. some Purism Librem devices to
>> >> a " Recently tested mainboards: " section - but, when I check
>> >> https://review.coreboot.org/cgit/board-status.git/log/purism , the
>> >> latest board status for Purism happened even before 4.9 ! And without
>> >> a recent enough _public_ "board status" report - containing the
>> >> important info about your build and its' complete configuration - I
>> >> don't think we could include them to a "recently tested" list, since
>> >> the other users won't have a chance to reproduce your build by using
>> >> your configuration. Same question regarding some other of these
>> >> additions, so removing them from a " Recently tested mainboards: "
>> >> list, but of course they could be re-added if someone will submit a
>> >> board_status reports from them.
>> >>
>> >> We would like to encourage the board status reporting, and relying on
>> >> the word of users ( "I tested X board and it worked" ) would not help
>> >> us to collect the known good configs at our coreboot/board_status
>> >> repository.
>> >>
>> >> To submit a board status report for your board, please run a
>> >> ./coreboot/util/board_status/board_status.sh script on it.
>> >>
>> >> Removed:
>> >> * Purism Librem 13 v1
>> >> * Purism Librem 15 v2
>> >> * Purism Librem 13 v2/v3
>> >> * Purism Librem 15 v3
>> >> * Purism Librem 13 v4
>> >> * Purism Librem 15 v4
>> >> * Samsung Chromebook 3 (google/celes)
>> >> * Acer Chromebook R11 (google/cyan)
>> >> * Google Chromebook Pixel 2013 (google/link)
>> >> * Toshiba Chromebook 2 (2014) (google/swanky)
>> >> * Dell Chromebook 13 7310 (google/lulu)
>> >> * Dell Inspiron Chromebook 14 (google/nami)
>> >> * Acer Chromebook 14 (google/edgar)
>> >> * HP Chromebook 13 G1 (google/chell)
>> >> * Asus Chromebox CN60 (google/panther)
>> >> * Asus Chromebox CN62 (google/guado)
>> >> * Asus Chromebox CN65 (google/fizz)
>> ___
>> coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
>>
> ___
> coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org
>


-- 
Tech III * AppControl * Endpoint Protection * Server Maintenance
Buncombe County Schools Technology Department Network Group
ComicSans Awareness Campaign 
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org

[coreboot] Re: BUG: Seabios choose the wrong option rom when two are available

[akjuxr3--- via coreboot]

Thanks for the reply. I have wrote to the SeaBIOS mailing list now: 
https://mail.coreboot.org/hyperkitty/list/seab...@seabios.org/thread/XWBCUC2UHH7AMALXI6G6Q75F7O2XNAKE/

I am reporting this to coreboot out of the normal user perspective. When the 
user have a typical OEM Bios on a mainboard with internal GPU, in normal cases 
when he install a PCIe graphics card, then by logic he probably wants to use 
the PCIe one because otherwise he wont have plugged it in.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/18504 creates such normal behavior the 
user is expecting.

I am using a default coreboot config. Just chosen the manufacturer and the 
model and then build and flash. Thus i have not chosen SeaBIOS myself. SeaBIOS 
is just the default coreboot option.
The functionality now is for a normal user completely strange. I dont think a 
normal user would even know what an option rom is. I dont know of any typical 
usecase where the user would want to use the option rom from a Intel IGD GPU on 
an NVIDIA/AMD PCIe GPU. Should the user really have to modify some config files 
to get the normal user experience when he is using just the default coreboot 
config?
___
coreboot mailing list -- coreboot@coreboot.org
To unsubscribe send an email to coreboot-le...@coreboot.org