[coreboot] flashrom and list of computers

[Ludwig Jaffe]

Hi all!
> On 06.06.2008 15:08, Ludwig Jaffe wrote:
>   
>> Lets rewrite / improve flashrom!
>>   
>>     
>
> A rewrite is unneccessary. Improvements are welcome.
>   
Yes, but there are some issues that are not straight enough.
For example: write and erase  try themselves to unlock the flash.
This should be handled by a generic unlock() which is function-pointered 
for the device in charge.
Also with the method lock()
>   
>> 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.
>   
Ok, but if we have known positives, we can use it for them. If no known 
positive, we at least write "Could be" asus p2b.
Like tcp-fingerprinting with nmap -O, the users report a fingerprint and 
nmap -O knows cisco PIX or what the hell...

>   
>> 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.
>   
OK, If you think so.
>   
>> 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.
>
>   
As written above:
we can prompt "could be" + "Report if you know better".
>> 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.
>   
this should also be function-pointered :-)
>   
>> 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.
>   
OK, I will do so.
How to check-out/check in stuff for flashrom? I would like to have a 
devel-account.
>   
>> Who is in charge for flashboot?
>>   
>>     
>
> Do you mean flashrom? If so, your patches can be reviewed by the list.
>
>   
Yes, beeing stupid I f*cked it up :-)
>> We should organize and manage the change-requests for that little piece 
>> of soft.
>>   
>>     
>
> Please post patches. We can discuss them.
>   
I posted a little bit some days ago for ST29F002 BNT/BT in my Compaq SFF 
PC 600MHZ. BX-Chipset
>
> Regards,
> Carl-Daniel
>
>   
Cheeres


Ludwig