Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> >> - printk(BIOS_INFO, "Mainboard MAHOGANY Enable. dev=0x%p\n", dev);
> >> + printk(BIOS_INFO, "Mainboard Kino Enable. dev=0x%p\n", dev);
..
> >> 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
Maybe make more use of __func__ then.
> - building multi-mainboard images means CONFIG_MAINBOARD_PART_NUMBER
> is not really meaningful.
Maybe it should be set by the build system per mainboard?
I think we still some time left before multiboard images, but I also
think that the current coreboot infrastructure is a really great
starting point for it.
I guess it will use the same scheme as fallback at least initially,
with some method added for determining the current board, that means
building one image per board anyway.
//Peter
--
coreboot mailing list: [email protected]
http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
