Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On 03/05/18 21:51, qtux wrote: > I uploaded a status report for the X201 and it contains the smashed > stack message. Since then I booted several times but was not able to > reproduce this stack smashing issue. It seems like that this kind of > error occurs only once after flashing. Please find

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

I uploaded a status report for the X201 and it contains the smashed stack message. Since then I booted several times but was not able to reproduce this stack smashing issue. It seems like that this kind of error occurs only once after flashing. Please find attached a diff of the notable

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

Hi Nico, On 02.05.2018 00:42, Nico Huber wrote: > Well, you better know what you are doing ;) that's indeed really true. :-) Regards, Reiner -- -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

Yeah I think you want to hunt this stack smash error down, it's not something you want to ignore. On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 11:09 AM Kyösti Mälkki wrote: > On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 8:53 PM, Nico Huber wrote: > > On 02.05.2018 18:37, qtux wrote: > >> Thanks

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 8:53 PM, Nico Huber wrote: > On 02.05.2018 18:37, qtux wrote: >> Thanks for your detailed explanation. So in essence shall I ignore the >> messages or blacklist lpc_ich? > > Yes, either ;) > >> >> Besides, while preparing the status report, I sometimes find a

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On 02.05.2018 18:37, qtux wrote: > Thanks for your detailed explanation. So in essence shall I ignore the > messages or blacklist lpc_ich? Yes, either ;) > > Besides, while preparing the status report, I sometimes find a "Smashed > stack detected in romstage!" message in the console log, just

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

Thanks for your detailed explanation. So in essence shall I ignore the messages or blacklist lpc_ich? Besides, while preparing the status report, I sometimes find a "Smashed stack detected in romstage!" message in the console log, just before ramstage is starting. Is there something to worry

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On 02.05.2018 00:03, qtux wrote: > ... > ACPI Warning: SystemIO range 0x0480-0x04AF > conflicts with OpRegion 0x0480-0x04EB (\GPIO) > (20180105/utaddress-247) > ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available for this device, you should use it > instead of the

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

Thank you Kyösti, your patch solves all irq issues and USB is working again on my X201i. I opened a review for adding the X201i as an X201 variant: https://review.coreboot.org/#/c/coreboot/+/25971/ Apart from that I have the following ACPI conflict with PMIO and GPIO: ACPI: Battery Slot [BAT0]

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

Beware that patch is incomplete! Coreboot dies at src/southbridge/intel/common/acpi_pirq_gen.c line 97: if (!lpcb_path) die("ACPI_PIRQ_GEN: Missing LPCB ACPI path\n"); You have to add the lpc_acpi_name function to src/southbridge/intel/ibexpeak/lpc.c as in

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 6:46 AM, qtux wrote: > I wrote a patch [0] for the finalize code issue. With that my X201i is > working fine on current master besides an regression introduced in commit > 7f5efd90e598320791200e03f761309ee04b58a3 [1]. With that regression USB and SD > card

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

April 30, 2018 5:51 AM, "qtux" wrote: > I wrote a patch [0] for the finalize code issue. It fixed master on my X201 too, thank you. Nicola -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://mail.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

I wrote a patch [0] for the finalize code issue. With that my X201i is working fine on current master besides an regression introduced in commit 7f5efd90e598320791200e03f761309ee04b58a3 [1]. With that regression USB and SD card is not working anymore and it raises the following errors: [

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 1:35 PM, Nicola Corna wrote: > April 28, 2018 5:59 PM, "Nico Huber" wrote: > >> Yes, that's very likely a problem. It looks like the whole finalize code >> path of the X201 was untested all the time (even on resume). I don't >> remember

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On 28.04.2018 17:34, Kyösti Mälkki wrote: > On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Nicola Corna wrote: >> April 27, 2018 12:29 PM, "Nicola Corna" wrote: >> With config PARALLEL_CPU_INIT=y so SMP / SMM init in initialize_cpus() will never call

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:41 PM, Nicola Corna wrote: > April 27, 2018 12:29 PM, "Nicola Corna" wrote: > >>> With config PARALLEL_CPU_INIT=y so SMP / SMM init in initialize_cpus() >>> will never call wait_other_cpus() at all. That actually regressed in >>> my

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

April 26, 2018 7:21 PM, "Kyösti Mälkki" wrote: > Well, smashed stack in romstage -error is no longer in the log, > possibly because this boot used MRC cache now. Could be, unfortunately I don't have first boot log, I'll grab it in the next test. > With config

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Nicola Corna wrote: > April 18, 2018 3:54 PM, "Kyösti Mälkki" wrote: > >> Having romstage stack smashed seems irrelevant for the no-boot issue. >> That nehalem raminit code, struct raminfo, seems to eat a lot of stack

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

Hi! I'm also interested in a running version of current master. On 25.04.2018 12:51, Nicola Corna wrote: > If needed I can do some tests on this PC. I also would do some testing on this machine, if that helps. Regards, Reiner -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

April 18, 2018 3:54 PM, "Kyösti Mälkki" wrote: > Having romstage stack smashed seems irrelevant for the no-boot issue. > That nehalem raminit code, struct raminfo, seems to eat a lot of stack > and an error message for that case was added with commit 2c3fd49. You > could

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

Hi On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:42 PM, Nicola Corna wrote: > Hi Paul, > > I can't make my X201 boot with the most recent commit: the screen turns on > and it shows a blinking > cursor, but that's all. > Attached you can find the debug log: as you can see it has detected a stack

Re: [coreboot] [RFH] Status of the Lenovo X201

Hi Paul, I can't make my X201 boot with the most recent commit: the screen turns on and it shows a blinking cursor, but that's all. Attached you can find the debug log: as you can see it has detected a stack smashing and it froze in a random point. I don't have the build config right now, but