[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Libreboot] Intel CPU without ME, Was: Blocking Intel ME ?

From: Denis 'GNUtoo' Carikli
Subject: [Libreboot] Intel CPU without ME, Was: Blocking Intel ME ?
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 18:47:23 +0100

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 06:37:08 -0800
address@hidden wrote:
> An ongoing demand exists for embedded systems.  In principle, a 
> cpu with no ME will be cheaper than one with a ME.

On Tue, 02 Feb 2016 16:44:29 +0100
Daniel Tarrero <address@hidden> wrote:
> take a look at this, can help in finding Intel MEs:

I don't think looking at individual CPUs is a good approach. You should
rather look at which Intel platform don't have an ME.

For instance if you take Nehalem[1], the first core i.7 generation
platform, the management engine is inside the chipset.
I don't know any way of having a Nehalem CPU work on hardware lacking
such management engine.

Looking at the availability or the lack of certain features such as
vPro[2] or even AMT[3] is not a reliable way to get confirmation that
the machine has or doesn't have a management engine:
-> AMT is only a firmware, it doesn't need to run on the management
   engine, it did run on Intel Ethernet cards at the beginning.
   The management engine also can run other firmwares, recent
   chromebooks don't ship with AMT, they have some other smaller
   firmware running on the management engine.
-> vPro[2] is also very vague and doesn't seem to be sufficient to
   positively or negatively identify the presence of a management

I think that documenting it is important.
I've started that in coreboot wiki[4], but it needs more machines and
Intel platforms.

Maybe some recent Intel platforms targeted for low power embedded
products, such as Quark, don't have an ME.
I wonder what freedom issues they have (if any) and how powerful they
are. Someone should check.



Attachment: pgpVYHI9z5YXD.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]