On 11.09.2010 01:39, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Marc Jones wrote:
>
>> -static void mahogany_enable(device_t dev)
>> +static void kino_enable(device_t dev)
>> {
>> - printk(BIOS_INFO, "Mainboard MAHOGANY Enable. dev=0x%p\n", dev);
>> + printk(BIOS_INFO, "Mainboard Kino Enable. dev=0x%p\n", dev);
>>
>> #if (CONFIG_GFXUMA == 1)
>> msr_t msr, msr2;
>> @@ -166,6 +121,6 @@
>> }
>>
>> struct chip_operations mainboard_ops = {
>> - CHIP_NAME("AMD MAHOGANY Mainboard")
>> - .enable_dev = mahogany_enable,
>> + CHIP_NAME("IEI Kino-780AM2 Mainboard")
>> + .enable_dev = kino_enable,
>> };
>>
>
> Could the mainboard enable function reuse the CHIP_NAME somehow, or
> maybe both should just use CONFIG_MAINBOARD_PART_NUMBER ?
>
I once had such a patch, but I think it was rejected for two reasons:
- grepping is more difficult because you have to match in two stages
- building multi-mainboard images means CONFIG_MAINBOARD_PART_NUMBER is
not really meaningful.
That said, I still support the idea and would be willing to update my patch.
Regards,
Carl-Daniel
--
http://www.hailfinger.org/
--
coreboot mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
