[coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread John de la Garza
I understand that the calling functions in 32 bit C uses the stack and this is why coreboot needs to use cache as RAM. Doesn't 64 bit C use registers to pass arguments to functions? If this is the case why not run in 64 bit mode? Also, even if cache as RAM is used and a stack is available, why

Re: [coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread Patrick Georgi
Am 10.08.2014 um 21:06 schrieb John de la Garza: Doesn't 64 bit C use registers to pass arguments to functions? If this is the case why not run in 64 bit mode? Even in 64bit mode you have to store state somewhere (that is, on the stack) before you have free registers to call new functions.

[coreboot] qemu-armv7: code execution out of RAM or ROM using latest QEMU

2014-08-10 Thread Piotr Król
Hi all, I tried to boot coreboot using latest qemu and figured out that it fails with: qemu: fatal: Trying to execute code outside RAM or ROM at 0x0400 R00=0002 R01= R02= R03= R04= R05= R06= R07= R08= R09=

Re: [coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko
On 10.08.2014 21:06, John de la Garza wrote: I understand that the calling functions in 32 bit C uses the stack and this is why coreboot needs to use cache as RAM. Doesn't 64 bit C use registers to pass arguments to functions? If this is the case why not run in 64 bit mode? Also, even if

Re: [coreboot] qemu-armv7: code execution out of RAM or ROM using latest QEMU

2014-08-10 Thread ron minnich
You can't assume much of anything. That commit seems not that harmful. What would help is if you tell us more about when the problem happens. There's just not enough info in your note, but I'd love to try to help. Thanks! ron On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Piotr Król pietrush...@gmail.com

Re: [coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread ron minnich
One of the reasons Im working to implement paging for 32-bit mode is for our eventual change to 64-bit mode for coreboot. It's gone on the back burner for a bit as I'm doing a few other coreboot things first. I'd love to have the help, if you have time. ron On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 1:02 PM,

Re: [coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread The Gluglug
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 What about 32-bit-only machines, or people that want to use a 32-bit OS? On 10/08/14 22:37, ron minnich wrote: One of the reasons Im working to implement paging for 32-bit mode is for our eventual change to 64-bit mode for coreboot. It's gone on

Re: [coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread ron minnich
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 2:48 PM, The Gluglug i...@gluglug.org.uk wrote: What about 32-bit-only machines, or people that want to use a 32-bit OS? well, we won't compile 64-bit firmware for 32-bit machines, if that helps. See: ARM v8 vs. v7. And a 32-bit OS can run on a machine with 64-bit

Re: [coreboot] qemu-armv7: code execution out of RAM or ROM using latest QEMU

2014-08-10 Thread Piotr Król
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 02:35:46PM -0700, ron minnich wrote: You can't assume much of anything. That commit seems not that harmful. What would help is if you tell us more about when the problem happens. There's just not enough info in your note, but I'd love to try to help. I will try to do

Re: [coreboot] qemu-armv7: code execution out of RAM or ROM using latest QEMU

2014-08-10 Thread Peter Stuge
Piotr Król wrote: Problem occurs at very early phase. Hm. There is no coreboot gdb support There is some gdb support in coreboot, but maybe not for ARM? so I used qemu '-s -S'. Whole qemu command: qemu-system-arm -M vexpress-a9 -m 1024M -nographic -kernel build/coreboot.rom Is -kernel

Re: [coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread Scott Duplichan
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko [mailto:phco...@gmail.com] wrote ]On 10.08.2014 21:06, John de la Garza wrote: ] I understand that the calling functions in 32 bit C uses the stack and ] this is why coreboot needs to use cache as RAM. Doesn't 64 bit C use ] registers to pass arguments to

Re: [coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread Marc Jones
Nice answer, Scott. You pointed out everything I was going to say. I think this is something we should put on the wiki in a FAQ. A 64bit ramstage has questionable value, but a 64bit payload might be useful. Marc On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Scott Duplichan sc...@notabs.org wrote: Vladimir

Re: [coreboot] why is firmware 32 bit as opposed to 64 bit

2014-08-10 Thread ron minnich
I understand the arguments. It's worth remembering that coreboot has to date run on 5 different architectures. 4 of those used paging. The x86 has always been the outlier. Lack of paging has costs not discussed much. Rmodules would be a lot simpler if we had paging. We could make the code space