On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Myles Watson <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I guess it's not really breadth first. It's just parents before siblings. >>> >>> I think this should be done for all the phases unless there's some >>> compelling reason not to. >> >> I don't think having different phases run in different order is a good >> idea, as it can lead to unexpected code execution orders all over again. > > I agree. > >> Code-wise this looks good if all phases act the same way. > > Without this patch Phase1, Phase2, and Phase6 are done in statictree > order, and Phase3, Phase4, and Phase5 are done Parents before > children. > > I don't see Phase1 being used anywhere. Phase2 is handled with the > patch. I think Phase6 should be updated, and I can send a patch. > > Ron? >
I think all the phases should be in parents before children order, ie the same order that the devices would get scan. That seems to be the most intuitive and should be consistent. Marc -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
