Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Tirumalesh]

Thanks for the info.
We are not planning to use OpenBMC.

Will try to give coreboot a try, if not planning to bootstrap directly Linux.

Thanks,
Tirumalesh

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 2:51 PM, taii...@gmx.com  wrote:

> On 10/20/2017 10:00 PM, Tirumalesh wrote: > Thanks for the information. > > 
> As I understand correctly, the main support is for x86 only. So if we want to 
> run coreboot as the only firmware, we have to do it our self. > Coreboot 
> supports ARM, which is the usual BMC processor of choice - although as I have 
> said you'd be much better off porting OpenBMC (preferably the better IBM 
> version for even more features) and having a management stack ready to go vs 
> having to make your own with coreboot (this is the first time I have heard of 
> that) -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org 
> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[taii...@gmx.com]

On 10/20/2017 10:00 PM, Tirumalesh wrote:


Thanks for the information.

As I understand correctly, the main support is for x86 only. So if we want to 
run coreboot as the only firmware, we have to do it our self.

Coreboot supports ARM, which is the usual BMC processor of choice - 
although as I have said you'd be much better off porting OpenBMC 
(preferably the better IBM version for even more features) and having a 
management stack ready to go vs having to make your own with coreboot 
(this is the first time I have heard of that)


--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Alberto Bursi]

On 10/21/2017 07:22 PM, Tirumalesh wrote:
> Using complete open source firmware is just one of the important 
> advantages.
>
> In my understanding coreboot provides lot more than that for a small team.
>
> 1. No drivers in firmware(leaving some basic things like spi etc)
> 2. A single image (firmware + Linux + rootfs)
> 3. The above means it’s very convenient for updates (major source of 
> security bugs)
> 4. Using same firmware on x86 and bmc means, what ever infra we 
> develop for board bring up and ops (as coreboot payload) works on both.
> 5. Same thing for secure booting.
>
>
> Most of the time the above things are also very important.
>
> Thanks,
> Tirumalesh.

Coreboot is hardware-specific, so the Coreboot that runs in the x86 
system will be very different from the one running in the BMC. They will 
have the same interfaces to boot a payload of course.

I'm not sure what kind of firmware you plan to deploy on both the x86 
system and the BMC.

The BMC has a very weak ARM processor and not much onboard flash for 
firmware. It is much better if you do 2 different payloads already.

Besides, on ARM systems the board bringup part (what Coreboot was born 
for) is done by a bootROM (read-only memory inside the ARM SoC, you 
can't do anything to this). Then it loads a bootloader from the device's 
flash memory.
This bootloader then does some more initalization, and then that loads a 
linux kernel written on raw flash or something like that and executes it.
 From there the Linux kernel takes over.

For the AST2400 the bootloader is uboot, and the openbmc project has the 
source to compile this part too so you can have a fully open system 
https://github.com/openbmc/u-boot/commit/f03ebaa6c2aefc49c0fdd6bdca51c666ba52663a

-Alberto
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Andrey Korolyov]

> 4. Using same firmware on x86 and bmc means, what ever infra we develop for
> board bring up and ops (as coreboot payload) works on both.
> 5. Same thing for secure booting.
>

While I borrow not much expertise there, these points are applicable
at this moment only if you are planning to run UEFI on both ARM and
x86 devices at once, all other things are pretty less generic and not
replaceable. UEFI is mentioned, but it could be u-boot or something
else which works as cross-platform bootloader and could be inserted
within a boot sequence stack on both IMC and host - on certain
hardware you would manage to get identical software stack on different
architectures for a small effort but for most times this is not true
and significant work needs to be done.

The second major point is a lack of host board signaling unification,
you would not even have a guarantee that same BMC-side GPIO pins are
responsible for same action types across boards of a single vendor
(true for generations of Supermicro removable BMCs), so each board or
board family would probably need additional work to create signaling
descriptions. I`m not sure if coreboot is an appropriate replacement
for OpenBMC efforts right there, as it was said before in this thread
because real positive outcome is barely imaginable from this
description.

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Tirumalesh]

Using complete open source firmware is just one of the important advantages.

In my understanding coreboot provides lot more than that for a small team.

1. No drivers in firmware(leaving some basic things like spi etc)
2. A single image (firmware + Linux + rootfs)
3. The above means it’s very convenient for updates (major source of security 
bugs)
4. Using same firmware on x86 and bmc means, what ever infra we develop for 
board bring up and ops (as coreboot payload) works on both.
5. Same thing for secure booting.

Most of the time the above things are also very important.

Thanks,
Tirumalesh.

On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 2:41 AM, Alberto Bursi  wrote:

> What's the point? Coreboot is not supposed to be used as BMC firmware. If you 
> want open BMC firmware you need to look for OpenBMC project, that supports 
> Aspeed BMC chips and provides all features a BMC firmware should provide. 
> https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc On 10/21/2017 04:00 AM, Tirumalesh wrote: 
> > Thanks for the information. > > As I understand correctly, the main support 
> is for x86 only. So if we > want to run coreboot as the only firmware, we 
> have to do it our self. > > Thanks, > Tirumalesh > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 
> 6:42 PM, taii...@gmx.com > wrote: >> On 10/20/2017 03:04 PM, Tirumalesh 
> wrote: > Thanks for the reply, it >> is somewhat strange though. > > It means 
> no server board runs fully >> with coreboot as firmware for both c86 and BMC. 
> > > If this is not >> the case, what kind of bmc is used by all the supported 
> boards, all >> of them are using different firmware for bmc and x86? As tim 
> said the >> KGPE-D16 and KCMA-D8 have a fully open source libre init process 
> on >> coreboot and support the libre OpenBMC for the AST BMC chip There >> 
> aren't any other coreboot boards that support a BMC, and the only >> other 
> device that has both fully open source firmware/init and an >> open source 
> BMC off the shelf is the TALOS 2. Coreboot itself >> couldn't be ran on a BMC 
> chip, well I suppose one could port it but >> there really wouldn't be a 
> point to that as that isn't what it was >> designed for. PS welcome to the 
> list :D > > -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org 
> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot @gmx.com> @gmx.com>-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Alberto Bursi]

What's the point?

Coreboot is not supposed to be used as BMC firmware.

If you want open BMC firmware you need to look for OpenBMC project, that 
supports Aspeed BMC chips and provides all features a BMC firmware 
should provide. https://github.com/openbmc/openbmc


On 10/21/2017 04:00 AM, Tirumalesh wrote:
> Thanks for the information.
>
> As I understand correctly, the main support is for x86 only. So if we 
> want to run coreboot as the only firmware, we have to do it our self.
>
> Thanks,
> Tirumalesh
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:42 PM, taii...@gmx.com  > wrote:
>> On 10/20/2017 03:04 PM, Tirumalesh wrote: > Thanks for the reply, it 
>> is somewhat strange though. > > It means no server board runs fully 
>> with coreboot as firmware for both c86 and BMC. > > If this is not 
>> the case, what kind of bmc is used by all the supported boards, all 
>> of them are using different firmware for bmc and x86? As tim said the 
>> KGPE-D16 and KCMA-D8 have a fully open source libre init process on 
>> coreboot and support the libre OpenBMC for the AST BMC chip There 
>> aren't any other coreboot boards that support a BMC, and the only 
>> other device that has both fully open source firmware/init and an 
>> open source BMC off the shelf is the TALOS 2. Coreboot itself 
>> couldn't be ran on a BMC chip, well I suppose one could port it but 
>> there really wouldn't be a point to that as that isn't what it was 
>> designed for. PS welcome to the list :D 
>
>

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Tirumalesh]

Thanks for the information.

As I understand correctly, the main support is for x86 only. So if we want to 
run coreboot as the only firmware, we have to do it our self.

Thanks,
Tirumalesh

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 6:42 PM, taii...@gmx.com  wrote:

> On 10/20/2017 03:04 PM, Tirumalesh wrote: > Thanks for the reply, it is 
> somewhat strange though. > > It means no server board runs fully with 
> coreboot as firmware for both c86 and BMC. > > If this is not the case, what 
> kind of bmc is used by all the supported boards, all of them are using 
> different firmware for bmc and x86? As tim said the KGPE-D16 and KCMA-D8 have 
> a fully open source libre init process on coreboot and support the libre 
> OpenBMC for the AST BMC chip There aren't any other coreboot boards that 
> support a BMC, and the only other device that has both fully open source 
> firmware/init and an open source BMC off the shelf is the TALOS 2. Coreboot 
> itself couldn't be ran on a BMC chip, well I suppose one could port it but 
> there really wouldn't be a point to that as that isn't what it was designed 
> for. PS welcome to the list :D-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[taii...@gmx.com]

On 10/20/2017 03:04 PM, Tirumalesh wrote:


Thanks for the reply, it is somewhat strange though.

It means no server board runs fully with coreboot as firmware for both c86 and 
BMC.

If this is not the case, what kind of bmc is used by all the supported boards, 
all of them are using different firmware for bmc and x86?
As tim said the KGPE-D16 and KCMA-D8 have a fully open source libre init 
process on coreboot and support the libre OpenBMC for the AST BMC chip


There aren't any other coreboot boards that support a BMC, and the only 
other device that has both fully open source firmware/init and an open 
source BMC off the shelf is the TALOS 2.


Coreboot itself couldn't be ran on a BMC chip, well I suppose one could 
port it but there really wouldn't be a point to that as that isn't what 
it was designed for.



PS welcome to the list :D

--
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Tirumalesh]

I am trying to see if coreboot can be main firmware on bmc.

Does coreboot supports any BMC chips in general?

Thanks,
Tirumalesh

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:42 AM, David Hendricks 
<[david.hendri...@gmail.com]("mailto:david.hendri...@gmail.com;)> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Tirumalesh 
> <[tirumal...@chalamarla.com]("mailto:tirumal...@chalamarla.com;)> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Could some one please let me know, if corebott supports either 
>> AST2400/AST2500 (ASpeed BMC)
>> If yes, how to test it with QEMU?
>
> What kind of support are you looking for? There is some support for 
> interfacing with it in coreboot running on the host: 
> [https://review.coreboot.org/cgit/coreboot.git/tree/src/drivers/aspeed]("https://review.coreboot.org/cgit/coreboot.git/tree/src/drivers/aspeed;)
>
> I believe this was added as part of the Asus KGPE-D16 OpenBMC porting effort: 
> [https://www.raptorengineering.com/coreboot/kgpe-d16-bmc-port-status.php]("https://www.raptorengineering.com/coreboot/kgpe-d16-bmc-port-status.php;)-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Tirumalesh]

Thanks for the reply, it is somewhat strange though.

It means no server board runs fully with coreboot as firmware for both c86 and 
BMC.

If this is not the case, what kind of bmc is used by all the supported boards, 
all of them are using different firmware for bmc and x86?

Thanks,
Tirumalesh

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Timothy Pearson 
 wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2017 01:42 PM, David 
> Hendricks wrote: > > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Tirumalesh > wrote: > 
> > Hi, > > Could some one please let me know, if corebott supports either > 
> AST2400/AST2500 (ASpeed BMC) > If yes, how to test it with QEMU? > > > What 
> kind of support are you looking for? There is some support for > interfacing 
> with it in coreboot running on the > host: 
> https://review.coreboot.org/cgit/coreboot.git/tree/src/drivers/aspeed >  > > 
> I believe this was added as part of the Asus KGPE-D16 OpenBMC porting > 
> effort: 
> https://www.raptorengineering.com/coreboot/kgpe-d16-bmc-port-status.php >  
> While somewhat similar in terms of interfaces / functionality, that board 
> uses the AST2050 which is a much less powerful chip. The AST2400 doesn't see 
> much use on x86 coreboot-supported platforms as far as I am aware; SuperMicro 
> likes to use it but it doesn't look like any of those boards are supported 
> (there are no reports for any of those boards in the board status repository 
> [1]). [1] https://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Motherboards - -- Timothy 
> Pearson Raptor Engineering +1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line) +1 (512) 690-0200 
> (switchboard) https://www.raptorengineering.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- 
> Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - 
> http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ 
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJZ6kSxAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFbqncH/20yUT8Lwdr7TiexfU8V8mIn 
> 5CU8qGFinO5gtOszHDxC5FUtWjSWHoQxXNMFgZrnvh63HZuyAr9+F4nj4gWcObey 
> cKsW4/OnNG6e83lSIQ/s9XabH2r0Fq2Tjof5vluS3eHX4UtzU2YqdFOgLAe4lca1 
> 0NXZ9mj760KBfYo8W3d6l/7TGAeN6D4DA2H7yoaWiy3ANXbuQOC1FYgVNrVEwuCq 
> jU+7TzQflrYSSvxAINoLjihpf5wu8mDxFob3wFRI7UR4dZn1Vo5c12ykkcb2GAbu 
> 7i8T1nn+zak04hwEdIEX4bvjuHA7Tqtpc2r8K+IhDZ8Y4WTKl4fNncMwUeHPuwk= =U/cT 
> -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org 
> https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot @chalamarla.com> 
> @chalamarla.com>-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Timothy Pearson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 10/20/2017 01:42 PM, David Hendricks wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Tirumalesh  > wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Could some one please let me know, if corebott supports either
> AST2400/AST2500 (ASpeed BMC)
> If yes, how to test it with QEMU?
> 
> 
> What kind of support are you looking for? There is some support for
> interfacing with it in coreboot running on the
> host: https://review.coreboot.org/cgit/coreboot.git/tree/src/drivers/aspeed
> 
> 
> I believe this was added as part of the Asus KGPE-D16 OpenBMC porting
> effort: 
> https://www.raptorengineering.com/coreboot/kgpe-d16-bmc-port-status.php
> 

While somewhat similar in terms of interfaces / functionality, that
board uses the AST2050 which is a much less powerful chip.

The AST2400 doesn't see much use on x86 coreboot-supported platforms as
far as I am aware; SuperMicro likes to use it but it doesn't look like
any of those boards are supported (there are no reports for any of those
boards in the board status repository [1]).

[1] https://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Motherboards

- -- 
Timothy Pearson
Raptor Engineering
+1 (415) 727-8645 (direct line)
+1 (512) 690-0200 (switchboard)
https://www.raptorengineering.com
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJZ6kSxAAoJEK+E3vEXDOFbqncH/20yUT8Lwdr7TiexfU8V8mIn
5CU8qGFinO5gtOszHDxC5FUtWjSWHoQxXNMFgZrnvh63HZuyAr9+F4nj4gWcObey
cKsW4/OnNG6e83lSIQ/s9XabH2r0Fq2Tjof5vluS3eHX4UtzU2YqdFOgLAe4lca1
0NXZ9mj760KBfYo8W3d6l/7TGAeN6D4DA2H7yoaWiy3ANXbuQOC1FYgVNrVEwuCq
jU+7TzQflrYSSvxAINoLjihpf5wu8mDxFob3wFRI7UR4dZn1Vo5c12ykkcb2GAbu
7i8T1nn+zak04hwEdIEX4bvjuHA7Tqtpc2r8K+IhDZ8Y4WTKl4fNncMwUeHPuwk=
=U/cT
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[David Hendricks]

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 7:46 AM, Tirumalesh 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Could some one please let me know, if corebott supports either
> AST2400/AST2500 (ASpeed BMC)
> If yes, how to test it with QEMU?
>

What kind of support are you looking for? There is some support for
interfacing with it in coreboot running on the host:
https://review.coreboot.org/cgit/coreboot.git/tree/src/drivers/aspeed

I believe this was added as part of the Asus KGPE-D16 OpenBMC porting
effort: https://www.raptorengineering.com/coreboot/kgpe-d16-
bmc-port-status.php
-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

[coreboot] ast2400 / ast2500

[Tirumalesh]

Hi,

Could some one please let me know, if corebott supports either AST2400/AST2500 
(ASpeed BMC)
If yes, how to test it with QEMU?

Thanks for the help,
Tirumalesh.-- 
coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org
https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot