[coreboot] [RFC] flashrom and coreboot tables

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Fri Apr 10 18:19:07 CEST 2009

I know that marking a mail as [RFC] is the best way to get no answers. I
wonder if that's the best way to get controversial patches in. Hmmm...

Richard Smith found a design limitation in flashrom the hard way: By
trying to work around it and getting a nice segfault.

Right now, flashrom assumes that if a coreboot table exists, the board
NEEDS a board specific enable function. If there is none (because it is
not needed), flashrom will complain.

Three options are available to solve this:
1. Leave the code as-is and confuse developers and users alike.
2. Add info to the coreboot table that the board doesn't need any
special flash enabling.
3. Provide dummy functions for every board supported by coreboot.

What do you prefer?



More information about the coreboot mailing list