Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Andrzej Szeszo wrote: > On 13 March 2015 at 00:59, Stefan Reinauer > wrote: > > >> - Is the SSD soldered to the board? > > > > Yes. > > It would be nice to look at motherboard pictures. Does anyone know if > there are any online? > > I am particularly interested if the mPCIe slot is present like in the > older model. I think it would allow adding some extra internal USB > storage which would make it a really nice general purpose coreboot > laptop :) > > http://i.imgur.com/dqOIc0k.jpg There is an unstuffed M.2 header at the bottom of the board (with USB2 only) in that picture, under the Type-C flex cable and next to the SD card. I do not know if there are any related components that would also be needed to make that header functional. -duncan -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
On 13 March 2015 at 00:59, Stefan Reinauer wrote: >> - Is the SSD soldered to the board? > > Yes. It would be nice to look at motherboard pictures. Does anyone know if there are any online? I am particularly interested if the mPCIe slot is present like in the older model. I think it would allow adding some extra internal USB storage which would make it a really nice general purpose coreboot laptop :) Cheers, Andrzej -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
On Friday, March 13, 2015 08:42:20 AM Paul Menzel wrote: > Am Freitag, den 13.03.2015, 00:05 -0500 schrieb Alexandru Gagniuc: > > On Friday, March 13, 2015 12:42:38 AM ron minnich wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:48 PM Paul Menzel wrote: > > > > As this is an Intel device [1] and I am waiting for an AMD based > > > > laptop, > > > > I’d say no. ;-) > > > > > > I'm not sure AMD improves the situation much any more, and in some ways > > > a > > > non-chromeos laptop has lots of other problems. On your AMD laptop, the > > > EC > > > will be a binary blob. If you're not worried about that, you should be. > > It depends on how the EC is wired up and what parts of the system it has > access to, doesn’t it? > > > Sadly, I don't think AMD understands what a Chromebook is. > > Sadly, I don’t think Google has understood how much power they have over > Intel with their Chromebook and Chromebox success. Sadly, I don't think Paul understands how little he knows about the subject. I don't know why everyone is taking this so close to their hearts. Paul expressed his opinion. It may be me being too drunk, but I'm clearly reading him say "I think". Alex signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
Paul, Paul Menzel wrote: > I don’t think Google has understood how much power they have over > Intel with their Chromebook and Chromebox success. It's inapppropriate to speak on behalf of others, please don't do that. The facts are that neither you nor I know anything about what Google might or might not discuss with Intel, since we aren't participating in any such discussions. I don't even know that there are any, although I can of course speculate on the topic. Everyone is entitled to have an opinion and speculation can be a lot of fun, but there is a time and a place for everything, and at least within coreboot, speculation on a mailing list isn't helpful. Your many other contributions are however very helpful! Thanks //Peter -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
Hi all, I put the mailing list under emergency moderation for a while because things heated up quickly. This wasn't coordinated with anyone, so please direct complaints about that at me. All incoming emails (to this thread = all of them) in that period were rejected with an explanation (I hope these ended up with the authors, we don't use that mechanism very often), and their authors can resend them if they feel that the mails add value while keeping the flames low. There are tons of fun (and some not so fun) stories about interactions with silicon vendors, some of them involving various degrees of binary only modules. But I think they're better told in person over some beverage of choice (eg. at the meet-ups we want to do in summer?) rather than on an impersonal medium like a mailing list - especially because it's such a frustrating issue. Patrick (speaking only for myself) -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
Guys, I don't speak for Ron but I don't find his comment (apparently sent in a emailed to a few folks but then made public (sic!)) elitist, it was a matter of fact question. I have been with Chromebook program pretty much from the very beginning, and I can tell you that the public availability of FSP and Coreboot support at Intel could not have been dreamed of even three years ago. Also, it is quite common among the SOC vendors to keep the early initialization and memory initialization code a very close secret. My $.02 (which might become as valuable as EU.02 any time now :) --vb On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 5:26 AM, wrote: > Ok Ron, > We all recognise your efforts and don't deny that the question of the binary > blobs" is a very complex and "politicaly hot" one.. > But (and I speak here from a STRICTLY personal point of view) it is the > fashion you chose to lecture Paul than I found not very nice.. > I sense a trace of elitism in your atitude (like you "GODs" have the > exclusive right to acces some secrets and we "mere mortals" have even no > right to think about these "things"..) I for one cannot swallow that!.. > Just my 2 (euro-cents) > Florentin > > - Mail d'origine - > De: ron minnich > À: eche...@free.fr, Coreboot > Envoyé: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 13:04:36 +0100 (CET) > Objet: Re: [coreboot] Re : Re: questions about google/samus > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:41 AM wrote: > >> Sorry Ron, >> What is his crime? >> Thought crime?.. >> Florentin >> >> > The problem with people making comments like this: > > >> > Sadly, I don’t think Google has understood how much power they have over >> > Intel with their Chromebook and Chromebox success. RAM initialization is >> > for example still a BLOB > > > is that people who don't know what's going on might take Paul's comments > seriously, and the next thing we know we're seeing mistakes like the Purism > laptop. > > It's also not very nice, given the amount of effort that we have made over > the years to get the blobs opened up, for Paul to claim that we "don't > understand how much power we have." Unless you've been involved in these > discussions, you can't possibly understand how difficult they are. > > ron > > > -- > coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org > http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 5:27 AM wrote: > Ok Ron, > We all recognise your efforts and don't deny that the question of the > binary blobs" is a very complex and "politicaly hot" one.. > But (and I speak here from a STRICTLY personal point of view) it is the > fashion you chose to lecture Paul than I found not very nice.. > > well then I'm very sorry, I should not write these notes when I'm still angry. The intent was to state the facts of the situation, which are difficult to say the least. If people want to say "BLOBS are bad", that's fine. If people start saying "Google does not understand ..." that is really not fine at all, because it is claiming knowledge that people do not have; and, the fact is, it's not at all nice to tell the people who are working so hard to remedy the blob situation that they don't understand what they're doing. I'm probably more frustrated than anyone with the BLOB mess, and that's part of why all my coreboot efforts go to RISCV nowadays. ron -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 4:41 AM wrote: > Sorry Ron, > What is his crime? > Thought crime?.. > Florentin > > The problem with people making comments like this: > > Sadly, I don’t think Google has understood how much power they have over > > Intel with their Chromebook and Chromebox success. RAM initialization is > > for example still a BLOB is that people who don't know what's going on might take Paul's comments seriously, and the next thing we know we're seeing mistakes like the Purism laptop. It's also not very nice, given the amount of effort that we have made over the years to get the blobs opened up, for Paul to claim that we "don't understand how much power we have." Unless you've been involved in these discussions, you can't possibly understand how difficult they are. ron -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 12:42 AM Paul Menzel < paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > > Sadly, I don’t think Google has understood how much power they have over > Intel with their Chromebook and Chromebox success. RAM initialization is > for example still a BLOB and, instead of getting Intel to publish it, > the firmware support package (FSP) will now be used for the Intel > devices. > > Paul, since you are not involved in any way with the Chromebook effort, do not work at Google or Intel, and, further, since nobody who *is* involved discusses any of these matters with you, I can not understand why you would make such a comment. ron -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
Am Freitag, den 13.03.2015, 00:05 -0500 schrieb Alexandru Gagniuc: > On Friday, March 13, 2015 12:42:38 AM ron minnich wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:48 PM Paul Menzel wrote: > > > As this is an Intel device [1] and I am waiting for an AMD based laptop, > > > I’d say no. ;-) > > > > I'm not sure AMD improves the situation much any more, and in some ways a > > non-chromeos laptop has lots of other problems. On your AMD laptop, the EC > > will be a binary blob. If you're not worried about that, you should be. It depends on how the EC is wired up and what parts of the system it has access to, doesn’t it? > Sadly, I don't think AMD understands what a Chromebook is. Sadly, I don’t think Google has understood how much power they have over Intel with their Chromebook and Chromebox success. RAM initialization is for example still a BLOB and, instead of getting Intel to publish it, the firmware support package (FSP) will now be used for the Intel devices. Thanks, Paul [1] https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/258220 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
On Friday, March 13, 2015 12:42:38 AM ron minnich wrote: > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:48 PM Paul Menzel < > > paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > As this is an Intel device [1] and I am waiting for an AMD based laptop, > > I’d say no. ;-) > > I'm not sure AMD improves the situation much any more, and in some ways a > non-chromeos laptop has lots of other problems. On your AMD laptop, the EC > will be a binary blob. If you're not worried about that, you should be. > Sadly, I don't think AMD understands what a Chromebook is. > ron -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
Hi Anthony, * Anthony Martin [150312 23:27]: > - Does it use the usual depthcharge payload with an internal > write-protect switch for flashing the firmware? There's no > boot guard shenanigans going on, correct? That is correct. Like all Chrome OS devices, Samus (Pixel2) uses the SPI flash's hardware write protect mechanism for a portion of the firmware (AKA RO firmware, root of trust). There are currently no plans to use boot guard in Chrome OS devices, as it does not provide the same level of protection as the existing security mechanism, but has a larger impact on using Chrome OS machines as "hackable devices". > - It looks like the gigabit ethernet device is disabled in the > device tree but are there pins or pads on the board to get > to it? There are no pads for GBit ethernet. As with most mobile devices, board space is too rare to leave unused things on there (even if you were willing to destroy the case to break it out) > - Can someone describe the keyboard in comparison to, say, an > older Macbook Pro, a Thinkpad X230 or X240, and the Toshiba > Chromebook 2? What is the key travel distance like? I'm not a keyboard expert, but I prefer the keyboard over my old MacBook Air. > - Is the display panel IPS or TN? 12.85-inch high resolution IPS (2560 x 1700, at 239 PPI) 400 nit, 3:2 aspect ratio > - Is the SSD soldered to the board? Yes. > - Could this be the coreboot laptop we've all been waiting for? :) I am biased on that topic, but it is the nicest coreboot laptop I have worked on, so far. Two USB Type C ports, open source EC and USB PD MCU firmware, and 12h battery life are my personal favorites. Stefan -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:48 PM Paul Menzel < paulepan...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > > > As this is an Intel device [1] and I am waiting for an AMD based laptop, > I’d say no. ;-) > > > I'm not sure AMD improves the situation much any more, and in some ways a non-chromeos laptop has lots of other problems. On your AMD laptop, the EC will be a binary blob. If you're not worried about that, you should be. ron -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
Re: [coreboot] questions about google/samus
Dear Anthony, Am Donnerstag, den 12.03.2015, 15:27 -0700 schrieb Anthony Martin: > I have a few questions about the samus device and I figure this > is the best place to ask. a link to that device would be nice for those not knowing the development names by heart. if BOARD_GOOGLE_SAMUS config BOARD_SPECIFIC_OPTIONS # dummy def_bool y select SOC_INTEL_BROADWELL select BOARD_ROMSIZE_KB_8192 select EC_GOOGLE_CHROMEEC select EC_SOFTWARE_SYNC select VIRTUAL_DEV_SWITCH […] […] > - Could this be the coreboot laptop we've all been waiting for? :) As this is an Intel device [1] and I am waiting for an AMD based laptop, I’d say no. ;-) Thanks, Paul [1] http://www.coreboot.org/Binary_situation signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
[coreboot] questions about google/samus
Hi, I have a few questions about the samus device and I figure this is the best place to ask. - Does it use the usual depthcharge payload with an internal write-protect switch for flashing the firmware? There's no boot guard shenanigans going on, correct? - It looks like the gigabit ethernet device is disabled in the device tree but are there pins or pads on the board to get to it? - Can someone describe the keyboard in comparison to, say, an older Macbook Pro, a Thinkpad X230 or X240, and the Toshiba Chromebook 2? What is the key travel distance like? - Is the display panel IPS or TN? - Is the SSD soldered to the board? - Could this be the coreboot laptop we've all been waiting for? :) Thanks, Anthony -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
