Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 03 Jun 2020 16:09:17 +0000
From:      myfreeweb <greg@unrelenting.technology>
To:        Dan Kotowski <dan.kotowski@a9development.com>
Cc:        freebsd-arm <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD on Layerscape/QorIQ LX2160X
Message-ID:  <49F29C72-F76C-46DA-920A-3148B4B0415A@unrelenting.technology>
In-Reply-To: <ZdPk7zJSE8UvoonkTixa2gV04ujgKfY93A71fz8cTB6ZPjt2uSCD5TdvFzDAEIR9Tu5LoGrcZLmXqgyrCmzh8OIB2JLc4gNKr6xF0pe931M=@a9development.com>
References:  <fn58k-44ZAkuwnDdytVzV-cLaB9amYMgZWydbpR_muUcKNZwohKqn9zFxqqw_Vz8Ij8L8yOSv0XhefrcTSo_bSYSOe5_7wcjoBWl8Q2dDVM=@a9development.com> <xoiJF1ZUP3-rgbxC8ZmJGQNpsJSyK4zsAXhbLl8Ml96Da1lBPGwPqn0ANf7q-GgthPAWePSR9QDCM5vKysd_3e2aGtp-0egUXu6AW3bhLDg=@a9development.com> <CANCZdfqbd_u35toFYKr4LKkCBwnRhutM5knjnVcGR018Jfo1Vw@mail.gmail.com> <664db38a87ea8803be72af9738534994@unrelenting.technology> <b5105ce888b7a91eff50ec9118a910a8@unrelenting.technology> <8951311F-77F7-40B8-AEA0-F8CBCB1A05DE@yahoo.com> <4ad62e6669044f82e71a9d86fd493356@unrelenting.technology> <ShdSNL8XDgj0KtPR4v8nn1ohjVssrnoUQGwNL-gHOpylio7Eo5J_WjA2Ko9YjV5md64MeFz017Ts01KUnpJa3Xpw4y_PncL4e5cfUcotRWM=@a9development.com> <31D3FA64-8296-4CA5-92A2-F7FE7C4AE981@unrelenting.technology> <ZdPk7zJSE8UvoonkTixa2gV04ujgKfY93A71fz8cTB6ZPjt2uSCD5TdvFzDAEIR9Tu5LoGrcZLmXqgyrCmzh8OIB2JLc4gNKr6xF0pe931M=@a9development.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On June 3, 2020 1:37:34 PM UTC, Dan Kotowski <dan=2Ekotowski@a9development=
=2Ecom> wrote:
>> > > I've sent a link to a known firmware build before:
>> > > https://drive=2Egoogle=2Ecom/file/d/1yXSS1O1U8CmtwaIPfxNDkzhAClJGvE=
rK/view
>> > > Have you tried it? Any difference in FreeBSD/NetBSD, with NVMe?
>> >
>> > I decided to go back to the UEFI sources and have found some differen=
ces that I think need to be reconciled before moving forward=2E That said, =
I'm not an ACPI wizard by any means - for me it's low-level mage spells at =
best=2E=2E=2E
>> > In https://github=2Ecom/SolidRun/edk2-platforms we have 2 different b=
ranches that SolidRun seems to use:
>> >
>> > 1=2E  LSDK-19=2E09-sr
>> > 2=2E  master-lx2160a
>> >
>> > I've been building from the latter branch, but found some significant=
 differences in the former that I think may be important to merge in=2E
>>
>> To me it seems like 19=2E09 is just outdated and doesn't have any benef=
its=2E Ask the solidrun people to be sure=2E
>>
>> Either way, nothing here would fix the interrupt bug=2E It's our bug si=
nce NetBSD works fine :(
>
>Any chance I can get a new test kernel without PCIe quirks? I just got a =
much more recent image from jnettlet with the following comments:
>
>BEGIN QUOTE
>If you are using that recent uefi firmware I posted then you shouldn't be=
 using the quirks for pcie=2E  That has an ecam shift setup where it should=
 behave=2E=2E=2E=2Erelatively to SBSA standards=2E
>it definitely won't work with the quirk enabled though=2E  I have to add =
an interface to edk2 to turn the mode on or off depending if you want acces=
s to the root bus and have a kernel with the quirk applied, or you want it =
to work with just the devices exposed but in a more compliant manner withou=
t quirks
>END QUOTE


In the last couple kernels I posted, you should be able to set debug=2Eacp=
i=2Edisabled=3Dpci_layerscape to skip the quirk=2E

I'll build the next one soon though, I guess with more interrupt debug pri=
nts lol



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?49F29C72-F76C-46DA-920A-3148B4B0415A>