On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:00 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 15.11.2008 04:32, ron minnich wrote: > > OK, another idea then. rework ROM layout. > > > > top 32k: stage 1. > > top-1 32k: fallback initram > > top-2 32k: normal initram > > The rest: the rest of lar. > > > > waste memory? yes. But this would let us dump PIC. > > > > I'd like to postpone the discussion about dropping PIC until it becomes > really necessary. Why? Because there are lots of benefits in freely > movable initram files inside LAR. For one, the ability to unpack > fallback/initram and repackage it as normal/initram (or vice versa) > would disappear. I couldn't justify that as a deliberate design decision > in any discussion. Especially the fact that there is no way to recognize > from a bare initram file whether it is fallback or normal is a killer > for the desire to be able to unpack and repack a LAR. > Should we just succumb to the way a factory BIOS does it? Initialize a minimal amount of ram with the default chipset timings in initram, then do a full blown ram init once we've got some real memory to work off of? Or would that not solve the problem? -Corey
-- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
