[coreboot] [PATCH] Add kconfig menus for most chipset VIDEO_MB values
joe at settoplinux.org
Tue Oct 27 04:27:33 CET 2009
On 10/26/2009 11:22 PM, Joseph Smith wrote:
> On 10/26/2009 11:18 PM, Myles Watson wrote:
>>>>> I think it's pretty ugly to have 512 be the value for CONFIG_VIDEO_MB
>>>>> means 512K. I know you didn't do that, but... Maybe we could just say
>>>>> 512K of RAM doesn't make that much difference and make the minimum
>>>> Yeah, the 512KB thing is not really nice, but there's not much we
>>>> can do
>>>> about it. We could turn VIDEO_MB into VIDEO_KB instead to have the same
>>>> unit everywhere, not sure if that's nicer or uglier.
>>>> I don't want to leave out valid options supported by the hardware
>>>> though, so the 512KB setting should stay. I think it's not _that_ big
>>>> of a problem as the uglyness is only visible to the developers of
>>>> two chipsets I think (i810 and i830), but not to the other developers
>>>> and especially not to the user (who sees nice menuconfig entries).
>>>> We can leave it as is IMHO.
>>> Yes it is ugly but decimals would be uglier (0.5MB) especially in
>>> calculations. Anyways if it is supported by the chip it should be there.
>> I don't think "supported by the chipset" is a strong enough argument.
>> are lots of horrible configurations supported by chips that aren't
>> by coreboot. If there's a good argument why someone might want 512K of
>> video memory instead of 1MB, then that's a reason to keep it.
>> It is hard for me to believe that saving 512K of RAM matters to anyone.
> I does when you don't care when you just use a shell (lamp server etc).
> Also if your board only has 128MB on board memory, you may want to
> conserve as much as you can.....
I remember when I used to run a clarkconnect sever on an i810. I turned
the vga down to the lowest setting in the bios, because clarkconnect did
not have a GUI.....
More information about the coreboot