| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Implement writeat and eraseat support into the region_device_ops struct.
Change-Id: Iac2cf32e523d2f19ee9e5feefe1fba8c68982f3d
Signed-off-by: Antonello Dettori <dev@dettori.io>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/15318
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Furquan Shaikh <furquan@google.com>
|
|
This reverts commit 65e33c08a9a88c52baaadaf515b9591856115a77.
This was the wrong logic to fix the master header.
Change-Id: I4688034831f09ac69abfd0660c76112deabd62ec
Signed-off-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/12824
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
Reviewed-by: Martin Roth <martinroth@google.com>
|
|
Since the introduction of the new (interim?) master header, coreboot
searches the whole ROM for CBFS entries. Fix that by aligning it on top
of the ROM.
Change-Id: I080cd4b746169a36462a49baff5e114b1f6f224a
Signed-off-by: Nico Huber <nico.huber@secunet.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/12810
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Tested-by: Raptor Engineering Automated Test Stand <noreply@raptorengineeringinc.com>
Reviewed-by: Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineeringinc.com>
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
Reviewed-by: Martin Roth <martinroth@google.com>
|
|
The Chrome OS verified boot path supported multiple CBFS
instances in the boot media as well as stand-alone assets
sitting in each vboot RW slot. Remove the support for the
stand-alone assets and always use CBFS accesses as the
way to retrieve data.
This is implemented by adding a cbfs_locator object which
is queried for locating the current CBFS. Additionally, it
is also signalled prior to when a program is about to be
loaded by coreboot for the subsequent stage/payload. This
provides the same opportunity as previous for vboot to
hook in and perform its logic.
BUG=chromium:445938
BRANCH=None
TEST=Built and ran on glados.
CQ-DEPEND=CL:307121,CL:31691,CL:31690
Change-Id: I6a3a15feb6edd355d6ec252c36b6f7885b383099
Signed-off-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/12689
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Tested-by: Raptor Engineering Automated Test Stand <noreply@raptorengineeringinc.com>
Reviewed-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Stefan Reinauer <stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org>
|
|
It encourages users from writing to the FSF without giving an address.
Linux also prefers to drop that and their checkpatch.pl (that we
imported) looks out for that.
This is the result of util/scripts/no-fsf-addresses.sh with no further
editing.
Change-Id: Ie96faea295fe001911d77dbc51e9a6789558fbd6
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/11888
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
|
|
On x86-64 the current way of calculating the base address
of the boot device (SPI flash) gets an unwanted sign extension,
making it live somewhere at the end of 64bit address space.
Enforce rom_base to be at the upper end of the 4G address space.
Change-Id: Ia81e82094d3c51f6c10e02b4b0df2f3e1519d39e
Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer <stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/11121
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
|
|
Assume that it's 64 byte.
Change-Id: I168facd92f64c2cf99c26c350c60317807a4aed4
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/10919
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
|
|
It never made sense to have bootblock_* in init, but
pirq_routing.c in boot, and some ld scripts on the main
level while others live in subdirectories.
This patch flattens the directory hierarchy and makes
x86 more similar to the other architectures.
Change-Id: I4056038fe7813e4d3d3042c441e7ab6076a36384
Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer <stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/10901
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Tested-by: Raptor Engineering Automated Test Stand <noreply@raptorengineeringinc.com>
Reviewed-by: Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
|
