[coreboot] is ACPI a superset of _MP_ or not?

Stefan Reinauer stepan at coresystems.de
Mon Feb 11 01:06:46 CET 2008

ron minnich wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2008 12:22 PM, Peter Stuge <peter at stuge.se> wrote:
>> Does anyone know how OLPC are doing with the device tree in x86
>> Linux? Seems that we want that (or another easy way to hand over
>> interrupt routing info to the kernel) pretty badly.
> This came up a while back. I tried to talk to one OLPC person about
> it, w.r.t. using OF tree instead of ACPI, but the reponse was not at
> all encouraging. It seemed you had to buy the whole package, including
> an open firmware bios and callbacks, or you could not really use the
> OF tree. I can find the email if anyone cares.

This is complementary to what uboot and ePAPR do. The whole embedded 
powerpc scene is shifting to using an OF tree without an actual open 
firmware system running. Remember: This is where "dtc" came from. So 
yes, of course it is possible.

> I think we should just continue to use _MP_.
On those platforms limited enough so they can still cope with that and 
on the other hand do not need to care for power consumption, yes. 
definitely. _MP_ is always good as a quick hack of getting things to work.

coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br.
      Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613
Email: info at coresystems.dehttp://www.coresystems.de/
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Freiburg • HRB 7656
Geschäftsführer: Stefan Reinauer • Ust-IdNr.: DE245674866

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20080211/a1a4c1d3/attachment.sig>

More information about the coreboot mailing list