Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
This header has nothing to do with cache-as-ram. Therefore, 'car'
is the wrong term to use. It is about providing a prototype for
*romstage*.
Change-Id: Ibc5bc6f3c38e74d6337c12f246846853ceae4743
Signed-off-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/6661
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Stefan Reinauer <stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org>
|
|
When passing '-ffreestanding' the 'main' romstage.c may no longer
necessarily be considered the entry point.
From the C specification in 5.1.2.1 Freestanding environment;
"In a freestanding environment (in which C program execution may take
place without any benefit of an operating system), the name and type of
the function called at program startup are implementation-defined."
Clang complains about these being missing as Clang is somewhat more
strict about the spec than GNU/GCC is. An advantage here is that a
different entry-point type-signature shall now be warned about at
compile time.
Change-Id: I467001adabd47958c30c9a15e3248e42ed1151f3
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <eocallaghan@alterapraxis.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/5872
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Patrick Georgi <patrick@georgi-clan.de>
|
|
Change-Id: I8e0d43293e095c1c76c3cfef1f426737624ea37f
Signed-off-by: Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/6063
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <eocallaghan@alterapraxis.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc Jones <marc.jones@se-eng.com>
|
|
Following the reasoning in,
8089f17 mainboard/lenovo/x230 Fix usage of GNU field designator extension
In C99 we defined a syntax for this. GCC's old syntax was deprecated.
Change-Id: Id967f6057759cf0603c84514d32b067c3658306f
Signed-off-by: Edward O'Callaghan <eocallaghan@alterapraxis.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/5831
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki@gmail.com>
|
|
The replacement function confirms CBMEM TOC is wiped clean on power
cycles and resets. It also introduces compatibility interface to ease
up transition to DYNAMIC_CBMEM.
Change-Id: Ic5445c5bff4aff22a43821f3064f2df458b9f250
Signed-off-by: Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/4668
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@google.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
|
|
Delay the copying of MRC cache data from CAR to CBMEM until after
sdram_initialize() returns and cbmem_initialize() completes.
Calling cbmem_initialize() twice would complicate the decision logic
of when CBMEM area needs to be wiped clean.
Change-Id: Ic59e94cb2436293efc47b52f7418f5dbf76c714a
Signed-off-by: Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/4666
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@google.com>
|
|
Number one reason to use cbfs_get_file was to get file length.
With previous patch no more need for this.
Change-Id: I330dda914d800c991757c5967b11963276ba9e00
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/4674
Reviewed-by: Patrick Georgi <patrick@georgi-clan.de>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
|
|
If romstage does not make cbmem_initialize() call, linker should
optimize the code for CAR migration away.
This simplifies design of CBMEM console by a considerable amount.
As console buffer is now migrated within cbmem_initialize() call there
is no longer need for cbmemc_reinit() call made at end of romstage.
Change-Id: I8675ecaafb641fa02675e9ba3f374caa8e240f1d
Signed-off-by: Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/3916
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@google.com>
|
|
Change-Id: I87b454c748cf885491d5b38bfe53a2ec0e9f38c5
Signed-off-by: Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/3910
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Patrick Georgi <patrick@georgi-clan.de>
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@google.com>
|
|
This retrieves back the value stored with store_initial_timestamp()
in the bootblock for southbridge.
Change-Id: I377c823706c33ed65af023d20d2e4323edd31199
Signed-off-by: Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki@gmail.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/3908
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Patrick Georgi <patrick@georgi-clan.de>
Reviewed-by: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@google.com>
|
|
Here's the great news: From now on you don't have to worry about
hitting the right io.h include anymore. Just forget about romcc_io.h
and use io.h instead. This cleanup has a number of advantages, like
you don't have to guard device/ includes for SMM and pre RAM
anymore. This allows to get rid of a number of ifdefs and will
generally make the code more readable and understandable.
Potentially in the future some of the code in the io.h __PRE_RAM__
path should move to device.h or other device/ includes instead,
but that's another incremental change.
Change-Id: I356f06110e2e355e9a5b4b08c132591f36fec7d9
Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer <reinauer@google.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/2872
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
|
|
This allows to drop some special cases in romstage.c
Change-Id: I53fdfcd1bb6ec21a5280afa07a40e3f0cba11c5d
Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer <reinauer@google.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/2551
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
|
|
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm very happy to announce coreboot support for
the latest and greatest Google Chromebook: The Chromebook Pixel.
See the link below for more information on the Chromebook Pixel, and
its exciting specs:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/devices/chromebooks.html#pixel
The device is running coreboot and open source firmware on the EC
(see ChromeEC commit for more information on that exciting topic)
Change-Id: I03d00cf391bbb1a32f330793fe9058493e088571
Signed-off-by: Stefan Reinauer <reinauer@google.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/2482
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
|