rminnich at gmail.com
Sun Jul 13 06:05:06 CEST 2008
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Tom Sylla <tsylla at gmail.com> wrote:
> The decode might seem interesting, but this is close to veering down a
> bad path.
> You do *not* want to try and futz around with any of those settings. The
> values in the table (plus the missing one for unterminated) are the only
> ones you will ever want to use. Thousands of hours of debug and
> validation time by AMD came up with those numbers. You should not have
> to "tweak" any of those settings to get something to work. There are
> comments in the coreboot source to that effect, too.
believe me, I dont' want to mess with them.
> My only reason to point this out is that by decoding it, you are sort of
> implying that the fields might need to be tweaked.
no. Here's my thinking. It could decode those bits and then say,
"This is appropriate to an UNTERMINATED bus with ONE row of DIMMS and
4 devices. "
"The DRAM hardware is configured for CL 2.5'
and so on.
I.e. allow people to backtrack from the settings to the hardware and
see if things make sense. The goals is NOT to tweak the individual
More information about the coreboot