From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 12:58:36 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] config: Define BOOTP client architecture and VCI for ARMv8 In-Reply-To: <5510728E.7000201@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1426853518-30227-1-git-send-email-thierry.reding@gmail.com> <550C4963.5030507@wwwdotorg.org> <20150320170853.GI32541@bill-the-cat> <5510728E.7000201@wwwdotorg.org> Message-ID: <20150325165836.GV32541@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 02:07:42PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 03/20/2015 11:08 AM, Tom Rini wrote: > >On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 10:22:59AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > >>On 03/20/2015 06:11 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: > >>>From: Thierry Reding > >>> > >>>Reuse the 32-bit ARM client architecture and identify ARMv8 specifically > >>>by setting the BOOTP VCI string. > >> > >>Is there a newer version of > >>https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4578.txt that says what this value > >>should be? Even 32-bit ARM isn't in that document, so I'm not sure > >>where 0x100 came from. > > > >I wonder if 0x100 is treated by the PXE implementations as "set but > >invalid, don't use". Digging into some PXE servers would shed some > >light here. > > I can't actually find any use of this in ISC DHCPd. At most, it > might be a value that user config files can match against if they > want. I guess it's not worth worrying about? Yeah, sounds like it to me. -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: