[coreboot] PCI MMCONF on amdfam10

ron minnich rminnich at gmail.com
Mon Dec 16 21:35:51 CET 2013


On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 2:29 AM, Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yet we have had commit 032c23db for 5 months:

which may mean, only, that the commit broke some things and nobody hit
those things until 5 months later?

Which is not at all unusual with a change of this type. It's why we
prefer that commits that are this far-reaching come with some amount
of testing.
That patch changed 7 mainboards; which of them were tested?

> I remember a week or so after this was merged you made that comment about
> i945 on a related change. I requested literature reference or a test case to
> see if I should revert. I got neither and the revert never took place.

It pays to listen to Stefan on matters such as these :-)

There are at least two reasons that your request might not have been
satisfiable.
- the public docs and the hardware disagree (very common)
- the public docs and the NDA docs disagree (this is very common)
   and the vendor knows it (also really common)

> Until you are  more specific on your statement, I am reading it as follows:
>
>   Stefan added 'select MMCONF_SUPPORT_DEFAULT' on a mainboard with i945
>   and the board did not boot.

And sometimes that's about as good a diagnosis as you can get.

Expecting anything more is not always realistic. That's what makes
firmware so hard, sometimes.

Meanwhile, we have a commit that broke some hardware. What do you want
to do about it? I agree with Aaron, things might need to be tweaked,
but ...
who's got that old hardware, and the time to do it? Do you have a
board of that ilk and the time to figure it out?

How do you intend to resolve the problem caused by this commit?

ron



More information about the coreboot mailing list