On 19/06/08 15:55 -0500, bari wrote: > Jordan Crouse wrote: > > On 19/06/08 15:23 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >> coreboot needs to have a solution/framework/interface for dealing > >> with embedded controllers. The trend seems to be that mainboards > >> will have more of these as time goes by. For existing boards, > >> coreboot may be able to load the existing embedded controller > >> code, but for new designs with coreboot firmware, the embedded > >> controller code will have to written from scratch and obviously > >> will require a toolchain and debugging tools. > >> > > > > When done right, the embedded controller will be transparent to > > coreboot. If you need a solution / framework / interface > > for dealing with custom embedded controller code, then the > > openEC project isn't doing a very good job. > > > Exactly! > > What is the ultimate dream here? To develop replacement open firmware > for existing embedded controllers > that have been used for years mainly in laptops and servers? > > To develop open firmware for embedded controllers that oem's and odm's > will use in new designs in the future? > > I understand why someone that enjoys tinkering with laptops and servers > might like this. I'm not sure that the odm's and oem's will be > interested in an open solution unless it is very stable and very well > supported.
If you do s/embedded controller/BIOS/ in the paragraphs, the argument remains exactly the same. Lets face it, coreboot and an embedded controller project are birds of a feather. What I'm saying is that in an ideal world, they can both exist without being aware of each other. Jordan -- Jordan Crouse Systems Software Development Engineer Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. -- coreboot mailing list [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
