Re: [PATCH] fix sata_sil compilation on non-DMI platforms

Re: [PATCH] fix sata_sil compilation on non-DMI platforms

[Alan Cox]

> Ideally the DMI subsystem should be provided wrappers for platforms 
> without DMI, rendering patches like this unnecessary.

Interesting question - is the PPC OpenFirmware machine information
mappable onto the DMI space ? or the various static bits of name
information in the various ARM and the like machine descriptions.

If not which bits are similar enough we could replace dmi at the high
level with an abstract interface for system/vendor/... that was ?

(

Re: [PATCH] fix sata_sil compilation on non-DMI platforms

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Mon, 2009-05-11 at 19:44 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Ideally the DMI subsystem should be provided wrappers for platforms 
> > without DMI, rendering patches like this unnecessary.
> 
> Interesting question - is the PPC OpenFirmware machine information
> mappable onto the DMI space ? or the various static bits of name
> information in the various ARM and the like machine descriptions.
> 
> If not which bits are similar enough we could replace dmi at the high
> level with an abstract interface for system/vendor/... that was ?

The one thing we could try to map would be the device-tree "compatible"
property which would contain vendor,system tuples from more specific to
more generic with which the machine is compatible with.

Of course I would argue the other way around and create a device-tree
from the DMI data :-)

Cheers,
Ben.