stepan at coresystems.de
Sat Jun 20 10:26:29 CEST 2009
On 20.06.2009 2:56 Uhr, ron minnich wrote:
> it's more than spinlock.
> you must also fix the use of the console_drivers struct. There are
> several things you need to get right to make this work.
> I am not sure I see the point. You're going to make lots of changes
> and in the end, using cpp magic, have a unified function which acts
> differently depending on how it's compiled.
The point is to have a single version of a printk like function. Two
printk like functions would work nicely, too. But at the moment there's
what, 6 implementations times 10 log levels? There's a lot of layers
that we don't really need.
> It makes the most sense to me to have a RAM printk and a ROM printk
> which are for different purposes. They already share the most
> important common piece, which is vtxprintf.
Yes. And a non-CAR printk, which is print, which works in romcc ;)
> But if you insist on unifying them you need to read the two parallel
> functions carefully and I guess do the #ifdef dance.
that was never the discussion. at least from my side. The idea is to
drop the macros that look like
#define printk_debug(foo...) do_printk(BIOS_DEBUG, foo)
and replace them by
#define printk(x...) do_printk(x)
and start using printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "%x\n", var); in stage 2 code. That
also works nicely for the CAR case.
Just the ROMCC case needs to stay old, but that's fine. It's only there
for old and broken architectures that can't do CAR, so it is allowed to
coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br.
Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613
Email: info at coresystems.de • http://www.coresystems.de/
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Freiburg • HRB 7656
Geschäftsführer: Stefan Reinauer • Ust-IdNr.: DE245674866
More information about the coreboot