Stefan Reinauer stepan at
Wed Jun 2 04:07:00 CEST 2004


* Eric W. Biederman <ebiederman at> [040602 06:33]:
> We certainly need to provide this information, as all motherboard
> specific information is the province of the motherboard firmware.
> However I'm not at all convinced that the ACPI tables are the right
> approach.
Can you go a bit into detail with this? In earlier discussions I
understood your standpoint as clearly on the table based side. Whether
such a table is called ACPI or LBTable is imho just a minor
implementation detail with the one being supported by more OSes and
companies while the other is definitely the one with the cleaner design.

> At any rate we need to really solve some of the more mundane issues
> like irq routing properly before we go to far with this.

Much of this can be described in ACPI tables, dropping the need for
MPtables and PIRQ tables. I think the modular concept of LinuxBIOS
really allows developers to address one issue without hurting
another. The current way of irq routing is less than elegant, I agree,
but it does it's job, taking the all-monthly fixing behind into regard.


More information about the coreboot mailing list