Clover General discussion

[vector sigma]

3 hours ago, anmool said:

anyone can tell me about this issue i think this issue is related shiki or quicktime player

Thanks, but this happened during installation..

[Slice]

1 hour ago, vector sigma said:

This looks like a boot0 issue.

 

 

No, it is not an issue. It is BIOS restriction.

[Matgen84]

3 hours ago, Sherlocks said:

 

i did clean all. and build again. strange. there is another issue.

 

 

Same issue here. Xcode 11.2.1/ Mojave 10.14.6

 

Spoiler

[CC] usbfix
/Users/mathieu/src/CloverBootloader/rEFIt_UEFI/cpp_util/XStringW.cpp:239:3: error: '__builtin_ms_va_start' used in System V ABI function
  VA_START (va, format);
  ^
/Users/mathieu/src/CloverBootloader/MdePkg/Include/Base.h:696:38: note: expanded from macro 'VA_START'
#define VA_START(Marker, Parameter)  __builtin_ms_va_start (Marker, Parameter)
                                     ^
/Users/mathieu/src/CloverBootloader/rEFIt_UEFI/cpp_util/XStringW.cpp:464:3: error: '__builtin_ms_va_start' used in System V ABI function
  VA_START (va, format);
  ^
/Users/mathieu/src/CloverBootloader/MdePkg/Include/Base.h:696:38: note: expanded from macro 'VA_START'
#define VA_START(Marker, Parameter)  __builtin_ms_va_start (Marker, Parameter)
                                     ^
2 errors generated.
make: *** [/Users/mathieu/src/CloverBootloader/Build/Clover/RELEASE_XCODE8/X64/rEFIt_UEFI/refit_cpp/OUTPUT/cpp_util/XStringW.obj] Error 1

build.py...
 : error 7000: Failed to execute command
    make tbuild [/Users/mathieu/src/CloverBootloader/Build/Clover/RELEASE_XCODE8/X64/rEFIt_UEFI/refit_cpp]

build.py...
 : error F002: Failed to build module
    /Users/mathieu/src/CloverBootloader/rEFIt_UEFI/refit_cpp.inf [X64, XCODE8, RELEASE]

- Failed -
Build end time: 09:30:23, Feb.17 2020
Build total time: 00:00:54

 

 

[Slice]

@Matgen84

1 hour ago, Jief_Machak said:

You have to regenerate conf folder, I think.

 

[Matgen84]

7 minutes ago, Slice said:

@Matgen84

 

 

How to regenerate conf folder? Just remove it and relaunch my script. Let me know, please.

 

EDIT: I try it, don't work. Same issue.

Edited February 17, 2020 by Matgen84

[Jief_Machak]

I think I tried also to compile on Windows. I got these errors. Is tools_def.template out of date for VS2017 ?

[Slice]

16 minutes ago, Jief_Machak said:

I think I tried also to compile on Windows. I got these errors. Is tools_def.template out of date for VS2017 ?

May be line endings changed?

 

[apianti]

The windows build script has some errors because changing the other build script but not the windows script. It is pretty easy to correct. Also, the tools_def.txt should just get made from the edk2 one by default. I think maybe you need to look at the config and see if some of that needs changed. Also, you need to build the build tools on windows for the first use:

edksetup.bat Rebuild
edksetup.bat

 

Edited February 17, 2020 by apianti

[Slice]

EDKII tools_def.template is not reliable for us. We edited it many times.

As well I can tell that the windows compilation worked for me a month ago on the same computer.

[Slice]

The new Clover compiled with GCC53 works on QEMU but hangs on real hardware scanning SPD.

I didn't catch the reason yet.

[Logician]

Deleted: Sorry, posted in wrong thread.

Edited February 18, 2020 by Logician

[Slice]

3 minutes ago, Logician said:

Anyone know why I cannot enable SIP?  I have 

<key>csr-active-config</key>
<data>AAAAAA==</data>

and I see

> nvram -p
csr-active-config	g%00%00%00

but when I check, I get

>csrutil status
System Integrity Protection status: disabled.

I don't know what else to check/try.

Because the syntax is wrong

        <key>CsrActiveConfig</key>
        <string>0x3E7</string>
to disable

        <key>CsrActiveConfig</key>
        <string>0</string>
to enable

[Matgen84]

2 minutes ago, Slice said:

Because the syntax is wrong

        <key>CsrActiveConfig</key>
        <string>0x3E7</string>
to disable

        <key>CsrActiveConfig</key>
        <string>0</string>
to enable

 

@Logician has delete his post, because he talk about OpenCore settings. 

[chris1111]

4 hours ago, Jief_Machak said:

clover-genconfig wasn't building because of 'extern "C"'.

Fixed. 

Works thanks

[chris1111]

2 hours ago, Slice said:

I already commit the cleanup. Look if this is correct.

All is correct the boot is perfect here

thanks

 

 

[Guest]

maybe is a bit OT here..some of clover's devs are investigating why new AMD TRX40 CPUs fails to boot with a memory allocation error in an early booting process stage?

@apianti and @slice i mean 

thank you

[Slice]

29 minutes ago, fabiosun said:

maybe is a bit OT here..some of clover's devs are investigating why new AMD TRX40 CPUs fails to boot with a memory allocation error in an early booting process stage?

@apianti and @slice i mean 

thank you

There must be a developer having AMD TRX40 CPU.

[Guest]

@Slice in the past there where a pretty similar problem with x99 platform  and some highend xeon and you ( the devs) solved that problem with a try and error process creating new aptiomemory driver...

Edited February 19, 2020 by Guest
Typo

[Slice]

9 hours ago, fabiosun said:

@Slice in the past there where a pretty similar problem with x99 platform  and some highend xeon and you ( the devs) solved that problem with a try and error process creating new aptiomemory driver...

I have datasheets from Intel and zero from AMD.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Slice said:

I have datasheets from Intel and zero from AMD.

do you mean these?

https://www.amd.com/en/support/tech-docs?f[0]=tech_docs_document_type%3Adata_sheets

 

[Guest]

or data like these one:

 

[Slice]

@fabiosun

What can I do with this knowledge?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Slice said:

@fabiosun

What can I do with this knowledge?

maybe you have the skill to understand why TRX40 chip fails to boot with a memory allocation errors on both main bootloader..i mean clover and acidanthera one

 

[apianti]

8 hours ago, Slice said:

Can you show asm codes for both cases? Where is the difference?

Historically only i++ and --i had a sense because they came from PDP11 assembler where there are instruction like

MOV (R1)+,R2

MOV R3, -(SP)

So C languages is very close to those machine codes.

Intel codes are different.

 

It is inherent in the behavior of the operator. Those CPUs have a special instruction specifically to do that, it is not very common because it is super expensive. No modern CPU has any instruction like this. The most optimized code for an increment would look like these, prefix:

mov rax, [address_of_variable_to_increment]
inc rax
mov [address_of_variable_to_increment], rax

postfix:

mov rax, [address_of_variable_to_increment]
mov rbx, rax
inc rbx
mov [address_of_variable_to_increment], rbx

This is the MOST optimized that either of these operators could be, most likely there is other stuff in registers though so you need to use graph coloring algorithm to determine how to use the registers most efficiently. I've only ever seen the prefix operator come out this optimized.

 

EDIT: I forgot you could do direct memory access, although I doubt the compiler is using these but this will actually make the postfix operator perform even worse compared to the prefix,

prefix:

inc [address_of_variable_to_increment]

postfix still has to operate some way like above.

 

EDIT2: Forgot, that those operators were created in B for convenience not C (C followed B's development at Bell Labs), the PDP-11 just easily supported these because of it's crazy complicated access modes, it didn't even exist yet when those operators were created. Dennis Ritchie even says so:

Quote

People often guess that they were created to use the auto-increment and auto-decrement address modes provided by the DEC PDP-11 on which C and Unix first became popular. This is historically impossible, since there was no PDP-11 when B was developed. 

 

Edited February 20, 2020 by apianti

[chris1111]

Compil failled latest commits

 

Edited February 20, 2020 by chris1111