From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: "Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] x86/moorestown: add moorestown platform flags
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:00:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090626150051.GA22223@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090626110429.GB12446@elte.hu>
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> And? There's an obvious quality difference between various
> platform enumeration methods - and we strive for the highest
> quality methods.
>
> Using boot flags is one of the lowest quality enumeration methods
> and the fact that there's precedence for it in other architectures
> is not a technical reason to make the same mistakes on x86 too.
>
> Especially here where there's two other enumeration methods easily
> available: SFI and PCI. Any of those suffices.
btw., the "I am MRST" bootstrap info is certainly doable via a
bootloader flag as well, if this platform is _so_ deprived of basic
PC features that it has no other channel of information. Especially
if it has no BIOS and if the bootloader provides the memory map as
well - which seems to be the case here.
I can understand the PCI ID space being potentially awkward (if many
models with mismatching PCI IDs are planned) - so it's certainly
possible that the only thing that remains in the end is the
bootloader provided flag - no matter how sucky that may be.
So i am not trying to make a bigger deal out of this than it really
deserves and this is not a showstopper in my eyes - but this is
really an exceptional case and shouldnt be the glory model for how
ultra embedded should be done on x86 ...
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-26 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-26 0:14 [PATCH 3/9] x86/moorestown: add moorestown platform flags Pan, Jacob jun
2009-06-26 7:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 9:13 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-26 9:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 10:16 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-26 11:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 11:56 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-26 12:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 12:33 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-26 12:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 13:34 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-26 14:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 14:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 16:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-26 16:54 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-06-30 6:35 ` Pavel Machek
2009-07-01 17:25 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-07-01 20:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 15:00 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-06-26 16:51 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-06-26 18:45 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090626150051.GA22223@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.