8131 and 8151 in static.c

Eric W. Biederman ebiederman at lnxi.com
Thu Nov 4 21:39:00 CET 2004

Li-Ta Lo <ollie at lanl.gov> writes:

> Eric,
> Why there is no 
> 	struct southbridge_amd_amd8131_config
> or
> 	struct southbridge_amd_amd8151_config

Because they don't need an enable_dev method.

> in ter static.c although we have
> 	chip southbridge/amd/amd8131
> and
> 	chip southbridge/amd/amd8151
> in the Config.lb?

The chips are found by their pci_ids.

> There is no
> 	struct chip_operations southbridge_amd_amd8131_ops
> nor
> 	struct chip_operations southbridge_amd_amd8151_ops
> nether.

Currently struct xxxxx_config and struct chip_operations xxx_ops
are tied together.  If you have you have both.

We don't currently require a struct chip_operations.

I have not thought enough about this to know if it is a good or
a bad thing.  It is simply the way it was done and I have not changed it.
If we always required this we could remove the config directive
from the configuration language.


More information about the coreboot mailing list