Reversing the default value of CONFIG_COMPRESS from 1 to 0
ollie at sis.com.tw
Mon Nov 18 20:02:01 CET 2002
On Tue, 2002-11-19 at 05:25, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Ronald G. Minnich" <rminnich at lanl.gov> writes:
> > Eric, how much heartburn is there if we set the default value of
> > CONFIG_COMPRESS to 0?
> > I've just hit another platform where it is trouble. At this point I
> > believe there are only a small number of platforms for which it works well
> > if set to 1. Do you have any issues if we have it default to 0, not 1, so
> > it is only enabled on platforms it is "known good" on?
> My gut reaction says to keep the default as is, and just change it for known
> problem boards.
> Long term we want memory at 0xf0000.
> In addition we have another way to solve this problem. Write the code to assign
> irqs, given a pirq table. And that is something long term we need to do as well.
If the problem only occurs for IRQ table, why do we copy them to EBDA
instead of 0xf0000 ?? Is the 639kB used for other purpose ??
More information about the coreboot