status information
Eric W. Biederman
ebiederman at lnxi.com
Sat Oct 30 13:30:01 CEST 2004
Stefan Reinauer <stepan at openbios.org> writes:
> * Eric W. Biederman <ebiederman at lnxi.com> [041029 00:44]:
> > > hmm, this sounds like a lot of potential pain for a small gain. Can we
> > > talk about this a bit first.
> >
> > Sure. First here are two examples.
> > struct chip_opertations cpu_intel_socket_mPGA479M_control = {
> > .name = "socket mPGA479M",
> > };
> >
> > Killing the name for cpu sockets allows us to kill the whole
> > structure.
>
> What was the original intention of the structure? It might be nice to
> know how many sockets there are and what CPUs are in those sockets..
> (ie some dmi kind of information)
We still have the cpu information via the device tree. As far as distinguishing
cpus from sockets that is mostly a matter of refinement.
The code is currently structured so you pull in support for which
cpus your socket supports. Which is the intention of having a socket
directory.
When we started generating device structures directly almost all of
the chip specific logic when away. But just a tiny bit was left
because there are something things that you do on a chip basis
rather than on a device basis.
struct chip is gone. struct chip_control was replaced by struct
chip_operations. Which has now been pruned down to just one
method, at least for now.
> > If you like I will trade you gdb stubs for the currently useless
> > debugging string names. ;) I just finished the code for that.
> > The conversations of the last couple of days inspired me. :)
>
> Hey.. this sounds cool!
Done. Check it out :)
Eric
More information about the coreboot
mailing list