digging a little deeper is always preferred to simply hiding the register, so, thanks David!
ron On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 12:10 AM, David Hubbard <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 2:03 PM, ron minnich <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Paul, you missed part of the picture. Suppose we have a different >> kernel, which does not have the same bug as Linux has,and that, >> further, depends on that register being visible? We can't know that >> such OSes exist, but we do not know that they do not. We'd have to at >> the very least test some of them. We've always tried to avoid being >> Linux-centric in coreboot and for the most part have succeeded. >> Further, hidden registers create their own problems. >> >> This problem has no clear solution. I've always felt that in all >> cases, we should err on the side of opening up the hardware, and not >> hiding registers. >> >> ron > > > I checked with Paul briefly on IRC, I think we may be missing something > obvious here. IOAPIC support is pretty fundamental; maybe the ck804 > brokenness is fixable? (I'm willing to dig in a little deeper and find out > what's going on here.) > > If so then there would be no need to make a special case for it in coreboot, > right? > > David -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
