| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
the release variable is all we need, turning a target on
or off for a given release.
the status checks were prone to bugs, and unnecessary; it
also broke certain benchmark scripts.
it's better to keep the lbmk logic simpler. board status
will be moved to the documentation instead.
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
raminit has never been fully reliable on this board, and so
this board has never been stable. so, now that lbmk specifies
such status per board, mark these boards as such.
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
export LBMK_VERSION_TYPE=x
x can be: stable, unstable
in target.cfg files, specify:
status=x
x can be: stable, unstable, broken, untested
if unset, lbmk defaults to "unknown"
if LBMK_VERSION_TYPE is set, no confirmation is asked
if the given target matches what's set (but what's set
in that environmental variable can only be stable or
unstable)
if LBMK_RELEASE="y", no confirmation is asked, unless
the target is something other than stable/unstable
"unstable" means it works, but has a few non-breaking
bugs, e.g. broken s3 on dell e6400
whereas, if raminit regularly fails or it is so absolutely
unreliable as to be unusable, then the board should be
declared "broken"
untested means: it has not been tested
With this change, it should now be easier to track whether
a given board is tested, in preparation for releases. When
working on trees/boards, status can be set for targets.
Also: in the board directory, you can add a "warn.txt" file
which will display a message. For example, if a board has a
particular quirk to watch out for, write that there. The message
will be printed during the build process, to stdout.
If status is anything *other* than stable, or it is unstable
but LBMK_VERSION_TYPE is not set to "unstable", and not building
a release, a confirmation is passed.
If the board is not specified as stable or unstable, during
a release build, the build is skipped and the ROM is not
provided in that release; this is in *addition* to
release="n" or release="y" that can be set in target.cfg,
which will skip the release build for that target if "n"
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
in a build test, canoeboot 0.1 builds, but master doesn't,
and neither does lbmk. i changed a few of them when doing
the crossgcc build optimisation patches.
i'm just copying the configs from there. unlike in the
canoeboot version of this patch, i've re-enabled microcode
updates in these lbmk configs.
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
arch no longer needs to be set, on multi-tree projects,
and it has been renamed to xarch
the new behaviour is: if xarch is set, treat it as a
list of crossgcc targets and go through the list. set
the first one as the target, for what lbmk builds, but
build all of the defined crossgccc targets
crossgcc_ada is now xlang, and defines which languages
to build, rather than whether to build gcc-gnat
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
at present, lbmk can remove microcode updates on images for
a given target, if the target specifies
microcode_required="n" in target.cfg
lbmk then provides images with microcode, and images without,
in a given release. although the user can also remove them
manually, this just makes it a bit more convenient, for those
users who do wish to run without the updates. this functionality
is provided only on those platforms where no-microcode is tested.
well, this behaviour implements a compromise on libreboot policy,
which is to always include microcode updates by default. see:
Binary Blob Reduction Policy
the *canoeboot* project now exists, developed in parallel with
libreboot, and it ships without microcode updates, on the same
targets where lbmk also handled this.
running without microcode updates is foolish, and should not
be encouraged. clean up lbmk by not providing this kludge.
the libreboot documentation will be updated, telling such users
to try canoeboot instead, or to remove the update from a given
libreboot rom - this is still possible, and mitigations such as
PECI disablement on GM45 are still in place (and will be kept),
so that this continues to work well.
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
don't handle "romtype" at all, in board target.cfg files
add /dev/null as pike2008 rom on amd boards. this serves
the same purpose, adding them as empty vga roms, to add
an empty rom in cbfs. pike2008 cards cause seabios to hang,
when their oproms are executed, so we insert a fake rom
on i945 thinkpads, use the coreboot config option:
CONFIG_INTEL_ADD_TOP_SWAP_BOOTBLOCK
when set, this enables the same bootblock copy, for use
with bucts. these two cases, namely pike2008 roms and
i945 bootblock copies, no longer need to be handled in code
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
only call crossgcc for coreboot and u-boot, but use
hostcc for everything else. simplify the checking of
which architecture to compile for. "arch" in target.cfg
files has been modified, to allow further simplification.
without this patch, the logic currently only *barely* avoids
using crossgcc on things like utils, and only works in practise
because, in practise, lbmk only works on x86_64 anyway.
the new logic, as per this patch, is simpler and more robust.
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
the logic for naming coreboot roms is based on whether
cpu_microcode_blob.bin would exist in cbfs, and whether
deletion was therefore successful.
lbmk was naming nomicrocode on fam15h roms on this basis,
but the microcode was being inserted as microcode_amd.bin
and microcode_amd_fam15h.bin
in the recent 20231021 release, the roms were exclusively
labeled _nomicrocode in the rom names, but they do in fact
contain microcode.
i'm fixing it by telling lbmk *not* to delete microcode.
if microcode_required is not set, or it's set to y, then
only roms *with* microcode updates are provided; even if
the rom doesn't actually contain it, lbmk will only label
it _nomicrocode if that setting is set to n.
i'm not bothering to add further complexity to the rom
handling logic, because canoeboot now exists anyway (at
website https://canoeboot.org/) which is my new version
re-implementing the older, inferior version of libreboot
so i'm going to:
1) document this as errata in the release
2) cross reference in the freedom status page
3) if someone still isn't happy, i'll say use canoeboot
job done.
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
in the future, we may start downloading files that aren't
blobs, such as mxm port configs (on mainboards that use
MXM graphics)
this directory will contain all of those files
generally change the language used, across lbmk, to make
use of "vendorfile" instead of "blob"
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
|
Signed-off-by: Leah Rowe <leah@libreboot.org>
|
