On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 01:40:33PM +, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 19/02/16 13:08, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > Although hardware_subarch has been in place since the x86 boot
> > protocol 2.07 it hasn't been used much. Enumerate current possible
> > values to avoid misuses and help with semantics
On 19/02/16 13:08, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Although hardware_subarch has been in place since the x86 boot
> protocol 2.07 it hasn't been used much. Enumerate current possible
> values to avoid misuses and help with semantics later at boot
> time should this be used further.
>
> Cc: Andy
On 19/02/16 14:08, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Although hardware_subarch has been in place since the x86 boot
> protocol 2.07 it hasn't been used much. Enumerate current possible
> values to avoid misuses and help with semantics later at boot
> time should this be used further.
>
> Cc: Andy
Although hardware_subarch has been in place since the x86 boot
protocol 2.07 it hasn't been used much. Enumerate current possible
values to avoid misuses and help with semantics later at boot
time should this be used further.
Cc: Andy Shevchenko
Signed-off-by: