[coreboot] flashrom and list of computers

[walter harms]

it is nice to see that so many people like the idea ... :)

back to basics. my suggestion was to have a list and perhaps a utility
that allows coreboot/flashrom to collect chip data from various box
in the hope to seek out easy targets and give the developers a new incentive.

I do not thing that the myriad PC boards need that much support. A very interessting
target could the std. desktop PC deployed by companies (DELL,HP, etc ..)
That would open a whole new area: a desktop PC that boots linux instandly.

Since journey starts with the first step and coreboot simply need a database about
deployed systems and there chipsets. To get many users as possible to submit data
a *simple* script is need that collect the informations and sends it directly to coreboot.org.

Next question: who will write that script ?

re
 wh



Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> On 06.06.2008 15:08, Ludwig Jaffe wrote:
>> Lets rewrite / improve flashrom!
>>   
> 
> A rewrite is unneccessary. Improvements are welcome.
> 
>> I would like to see an universal function-pointer approach for the 
>> flash-dev handling, as I stated before in this mailing list.
>>   
> 
> We already have that.
> 
>> For detection of flash the flash-identification according to the 
>> manufacturers can be used, so all functionpointers for the
>> detect-routines can be tried.
>>   
> 
> We already do that.
> 
>> To detect the mainboard I would additionally suggest looking for strings 
>> in the bios (if original-bios is used).
> 
> Sorry, that will not work reliably. We have some known false positives
> and some known false negatives.
> 
>> For Coreboot, I would suggest to
>> have a short text with manufacturer, board model, chipset, cpu so string 
>> search can find something.
>>   
> 
> We already have strings with board manufacturer+model. Chipset and CPU
> strings do not make sense.
> 
>> Not to fall over all garbage the string search has to be filtered with 
>> known names as compaq, hp, ibm, asus, phoenix, award, and the like.
>>
>> Using DMI is better for newer boards having DMI.
>>   
> 
> Sorry, that will not work reliably. We have some known false positives
> and some known false negatives.
> 
>> So one can build different strategies for identifiing the mainboard. And 
>> use a functionpointer approach to do special tasks for the boards
>> e.g. switching the bios to flash (some boards have a 2 bios-sockets)
>>   
> 
> We already do that.
> 
>> e.g. unprotecting the boot-block.  (e.g. my compaq SFF PC needs P34 
>> soldered in and closed.) So an appropriate text has to be printed, if the
>> board can not automagically disable write-protection etc.
>> e.g. do other fancy stuff like unlocking the case.
>>   
> 
> We already can do that if anyone commits a text message.
> 
>> Who is in charge for flashboot?
>>   
> 
> Do you mean flashrom? If so, your patches can be reviewed by the list.
> 
>> We should organize and manage the change-requests for that little piece 
>> of soft.
>>   
> 
> Please post patches. We can discuss them.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Carl-Daniel
> 
>