On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:35 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 am still sort of out but you guys are on the right approach, do what you think best. I trust you ... ron -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
