The DoC problem
Ronald G Minnich
rminnich at lanl.gov
Mon Sep 9 09:38:00 CEST 2002
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Hamish Guthrie (Mail Lists) wrote:
> I think the DoC mess is here to stay, there is one potential solution if
> people are insisting on having DoC, and that is to make up a little board
> which plugs into a BIOS socket which has both a 256k flash device and a
> little bit of decode logic for a DoC, as well as a DoC - if anyone is
> interested in this approach, I could knock together a few prototypes for a
> couple of $'s, but I have my reservations as to this being a permanent
> long-term solution for production systems.
I was not clear but what I want is something that works for long-term
production systems. It seems that DoC is unsuitable in the long term due
to DoC limitations and M-systems lousy attitude.
I'm thinking in terms of what a company like cwlinux.com could ship to
users. The IDE-FLASH would have to be either slave on the primary channel
or master on the secondary channel. But wouldn't a slow IDE-FLASH on
either channel make the other device run slowly? I thought this used to
be the rule -- the IDE bus ran only as fast as the slowest device?
More information about the coreboot