On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 04:33:15PM +0200, Stefan Reinauer wrote: > >This thread seems to reinvent VSA. > > VSA is one possible implementation of an SMM handler.
I was thinking about the plugging and services and so on. I have always enjoyed coreboot being SMM free, and I consider that a huge marketing advantage even with the SMM handler being optional. Also, if it is easy to add SMM code to coreboot I'm afraid it will become a trend and to me, it is not the right fix for anything. > Advocatus diaboli: Just like Windows is a possible implementation > of a protected mode OS. Does this make protected mode bad per se? I like PM, but not SMM. My beef with SMM besides virtualizing hardware is the segregation and to some degree duplication of logic between OS and $othercode. Just like we enjoy Linux as bootloader because drivers are only in one place, I want to enjoy the operating system doing everything SMM is used for. You know, operations. Yes, it is revolutionary, at least for PCs. > >I agree with Stefan that we have to go through this as a learning > >exercise. Things will undoubtly get a lot worse before they get > >better. > > What exactly makes being able to support laptops so bad in your > opinion? Not what, but how. Again, it is an inevitable first step, but I don't want to settle down once it is done. I am afraid that what I consider to be the wrong solution will gather critical mass very quickly because people think it is good enough, and that yet another migration will be too painful. Sorry if I sound too cynical. Blame the kernel guys who show no love. :p //Peter -- coreboot mailing list [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
