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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox