This patch is trying to address some of the concerns raised in CB:50247
after the patch had landed. The preference for alphabetized headers was
just supposed to discourage leaving headers completely unordered, and
wasn't intended to disallow other intentional include orderings such as
grouping local includes after system ones or specific ordering
constraints that exist for technical reasons. This patch adds a few more
sentences to try to clarify that.
Signed-off-by: Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org>
Change-Id: I6825f4a57613fabb88a00ae46679b4774ef7110b
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/51553
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Nico Huber <nico.h@gmx.de>
Let's gather some documentation ideas for the season of docs. I reused
the project ideas style (thanks Patrick). Feel free to add yourself as a
mentor here. Also if you have more ideas, please add them to the
document.
Change-Id: I72221cbd53b99cdc946109753cf72af9c865a1e5
Signed-off-by: Christian Walter <christian.walter@9elements.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/40662
Reviewed-by: Patrick Rudolph <siro@das-labor.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
The coverity project is done, for the most part, so drop it. Expand
a bit on the scope of the toolchain binary project, and point out
that the Ghidra project already has code from GSoC 2019 but could be
developed further.
Change-Id: I7342cc3133494f69b175b11b1f8342a0f40840e7
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/39086
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Jacob Garber <jgarber1@ualberta.ca>
Reviewed-by: Patrick Rudolph <siro@das-labor.org>
This has been implemented last year.
Change-Id: I24e40a7a9a9d7238b8c9d34656d5b62a26b8252b
Signed-off-by: Patrick Rudolph <patrick.rudolph@9elements.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/38533
Reviewed-by: Arthur Heymans <arthur@aheymans.xyz>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
The MIPS architecture port has been added 5+ years ago in order to
support a Chrome OS project that ended up going nowhere. No other board
has used it since and nobody is still willing or has the expertise and
hardware to maintain it. We have decided that it has become too much of
a mainenance burden and the chance of anyone ever reviving it seems too
slim at this point. This patch eliminates all MIPS code and
MIPS-specific hacks.
Change-Id: I5e49451cd055bbab0a15dcae5f53e0172e6e2ebe
Signed-off-by: Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/34919
Reviewed-by: Arthur Heymans <arthur@aheymans.xyz>
Reviewed-by: Hung-Te Lin <hungte@chromium.org>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
It may be useful to have a common, easily available toolbench for
firmware analysis and Ghidra looks promising.
Change-Id: I56d0ff875bb939f6d31f088232f8a6fd168abbb6
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/31806
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
One-off packages do us little good, we need to be able to automate
building them.
Change-Id: Idd9b6b231435ea9d6e946c7ccaa71174b497742c
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/31804
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
The requirements read a bit as if we only encourage coreboot experts to
try to take on these projects. These requirements should be understood
as "this is what you'll need to learn", hopefully guiding interested
people in picking a project that suits their interests.
Change-Id: I43b6e2e0df5f00e1ded8d14cee8c771e3f595ce7
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/31480
Reviewed-by: HAOUAS Elyes <ehaouas@noos.fr>
Reviewed-by: Nico Huber <nico.h@gmx.de>
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
A couple people discussed recently how it's a shame that on some
architectures we can bring up a device but then have nothing to do with
it afterwards. Having payloads to choose from would help a lot there.
Change-Id: Ia66f22947d09afe3076cc2ee12f5b652fe80fc3a
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/31415
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Arthur Heymans <arthur@aheymans.xyz>
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Adding the Kernel Address Sanitizer feature to coreboot would help to
find bugs.
Change-Id: If00010e81147ec50e037678230df17c6888e40a2
Signed-off-by: Werner Zeh <werner.zeh@siemens.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/31414
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
Reviewed-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
We already had such a page on the wiki, but it's outdated and the wiki
is supposed to go the way of the dodo anyway.
This is a fresh start to make sure that all ideas we're coming up with
are still current and that there are mentors willing to support them.
Change-Id: Idd68f845930bd37a2293969b9a153cf584d6d15f
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/30972
Reviewed-by: Angel Pons <th3fanbus@gmail.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins) <no-reply@coreboot.org>
Julius Werner