Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Coreboot Begins Supporting A New AMD Fusion Board

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,400

    Default Coreboot Begins Supporting A New AMD Fusion Board

    Phoronix: Coreboot Begins Supporting A New AMD Fusion Board

    The Coreboot open-source alternative to using proprietary motherboard BIOS firmwares now supports a new AMD Fusion motherboard in the upstream code...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTYwNTU

  2. #2

    Default

    Not bad, still need something that supports Kaveri though. Seems they redid the support page, looks to not have some of the previously supported mobos listed anymore, I forget the AM3+ model they used to list.

    Also I see you are finally self hosting ads Larabel. Dunno if you've loaded any Flash based versions yet as I refuse to even install Shumway, Gnash or Lightspark. But if you host anything that demands attention or makes noise I'll block em' all. I have the technology.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    in front of my box :p
    Posts
    822

    Default

    Noes!
    I mean, yes, nice!
    But why are constantly boards supported that are not in the normal reach of customers? Yes, I do have a Jetway Mainboard but that is a VIA C7. But Jetway is a rare sight an the AMD G-something series is as well. Industrial embedded, hard to find a shop and then, being "industrial quality" with thermal and vibrational stability to the roof, double the price of a normal mainboard.

    Basically as far as I understand coreboot needs 3 or 4 classes to support any mainboard. The CPU (which is in 99% always supported), built in NB, and the external chipset basics, which also includes Super I/O. And here we have the problem since some chipsets are not fully supported yet or lacking documentation and the same goes for those pesky Super I/Os.

    http://www.coreboot.org/Supported_Chipsets_and_Devices

    AMD is normally fast with support (unlike intel who were long opposed to coreboot since they wanted to push their shitty UEFI), but if the mainboard vendor uses a Super I/O that is undocumented (see my request on this here
    http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showt...IT8518-etc-%29 ) then things look bad.

    Next obstacle is: Laptop vendors (very horrible) and sometimes mainboard vendors (situation is less severe here). Soldered firmware chips (instead of socketed) and no documentation what is built in besides the usual pitchmannery. In huge letters the CPU, the price (and that pesky W8 logo as if that would help sales). Very often no info on the chips used. And it's hard to find any contact since Support only exists to get rid of customers as quick as possible. And they love to send send you unrelated copies from a FAQ that you could have read online for yourself and that is not related to your problem/question.

    It is so sad that only few enterprises who sell to the end customers support coreboot. The Chromebooks have (but I don't want Android + 16 GB storage-you-have-to-use-our-cloud) and some embedded enterprises (which is still fine and awesome but often it's nothing I could use at home) - but we need support (at least no hindrance) from companies like Asus, Lenovo, Dell, HP, Acer, MSI, Fujitsu, Toshiba, Zotac to name a few.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adarion View Post
    Next obstacle is: Laptop vendors (very horrible) and sometimes mainboard vendors (situation is less severe here). Soldered firmware chips (instead of socketed) and no documentation what is built in besides the usual pitchmannery. In huge letters the CPU, the price (and that pesky W8 logo as if that would help sales). Very often no info on the chips used. And it's hard to find any contact since Support only exists to get rid of customers as quick as possible. And they love to send send you unrelated copies from a FAQ that you could have read online for yourself and that is not related to your problem/question.

    It is so sad that only few enterprises who sell to the end customers support coreboot. The Chromebooks have (but I don't want Android + 16 GB storage-you-have-to-use-our-cloud) and some embedded enterprises (which is still fine and awesome but often it's nothing I could use at home) - but we need support (at least no hindrance) from companies like Asus, Lenovo, Dell, HP, Acer, MSI, Fujitsu, Toshiba, Zotac to name a few.
    I think you're completely missing the big picture - very few customers even know what Coreboot is, and fewer want support for it. Most customers buying a motherboard want to put it together to make a gaming PC that they'll be loading Windows on. Even if they want to use Linux, why should they care what the board's firmware is if it boots their OS correctly and isn't horribly broken? Then there's the laptop buyers - they don't care at all what's going on as long as they can do their work and their laptop runs reliably and doesn't cause problems.

    I'm not saying that Coreboot isn't pointless or doesn't have its advantages. But from a business perspective, given that even most Linux enthusiasts don't know or care about Coreboot, why should manufacturers rush out of their way to provide support for it at their own expense for a feature that has very little demand? Heck, even I'm not too bothered that my Asus P8P67-M Pro only has UEFI - it works well and boots me into Linux quickly, which is what I expect of it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    14

    Default

    This is from 2011 and probably EOL with only a few remaining in stock somewhere.
    So it's not really a "new" board but just "another" board...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ricequackers View Post
    Heck, even I'm not too bothered that my Asus P8P67-M Pro only has UEFI - it works well and boots me into Linux quickly, which is what I expect of it.
    I also have the same motherboard and it needs like 5-10 seconds to launch GRUB (depending on the options selected, UEFI mode). I wouldn't call it quick.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kruger View Post
    I also have the same motherboard and it needs like 5-10 seconds to launch GRUB (depending on the options selected, UEFI mode). I wouldn't call it quick.
    Odd, it's done in less than 3 seconds for me. Try disabling unnecessary stuff like the Marvell SATA controller. I also use EFI stub to boot the kernel directly if that makes a difference?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,646

    Default

    @ricequackers

    I think Asus UEFI firmware is full of bugs. Does WOL work correctly for your system? I could not boot with UEFI set first and a Gigabyte Nv 650 Ti with UEFI compatible firmware (but worked in another board). I needed to enable legacy mode to init gfx (not needed for onboard vga).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    29

    Default

    WOL worked correctly for me last time I tried it (I don't really use it though). My 7970 works fine too and the system is UEFI-only, with both Arch Linux and Windows 8.1 installed.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    in front of my box :p
    Posts
    822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ricequackers View Post
    But from a business perspective...
    Well, partially yes. But in the light of recent and past issues with UEFI (bugs and lots of bricked hardware, and UEFI being quite crap by design) and with the ongoing security battle (NSA infested firmware anyone?) Coreboot should be a considerable option.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •