Hi Graeme, On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:38 PM, Graeme Russ <graeme.r...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: >> Hi Graeme, >> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Graeme Russ <graeme.r...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi Simon, >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>> Enable AHCI driver for Intel SATA devices. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> >>>> --- >>>> include/configs/coreboot.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/include/configs/coreboot.h b/include/configs/coreboot.h >>>> index 3df085b..968a9c5 100644 >>>> --- a/include/configs/coreboot.h >>>> +++ b/include/configs/coreboot.h >>>> @@ -45,6 +45,27 @@ >>>> #undef CONFIG_WATCHDOG >>>> #undef CONFIG_HW_WATCHDOG >>>> >>>> +/* SATA AHCI storage */ >>>> + >>>> +#define CONFIG_SCSI_AHCI >>>> + >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCSI_AHCI >>>> +#define CONFIG_SATA_INTEL 1 >>>> +#define CONFIG_SCSI_DEV_LIST {PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, \ >>>> + PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_NM10_AHCI}, \ >>>> + {PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, \ >>>> + PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_AHCI_MOBILE}, \ >>>> + {PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, \ >>>> + PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_AHCI_SERIES6}, \ >>>> + {PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, \ >>>> + PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PANTHERPOINT_AHCI_MOBILE} >>> >>> This implies every coreboot board is Intel. When you start to >>> introduce hardware specific U-Boot components, you need to introduce a >>> board specific config file. >>> >>> Would it be better to have a CONFIG_X86_COREBOOT and a coreboot 'SoC' >>> and no coreboot board? >> >> I am not sure about using the SOC - after all we might need that >> concept soon on x86. Maybe we should create a new board config that >> includes coreboot.h? > > SoC was the wrong abstraction - I think coreboot library is better > (see my email I just sent)
Yes, ok. I can do a patch to move it, or do you want to? Presumably this would come in after the patches that are already pending on the mailing list? > >> Having said that I'm not sure how important it is right now. So far, >> coreboot.h is actually a particular class of boards, all Intel based. >> We can name it whatever we want when we actually have other boards >> which are coreboot but not Intel. Up to you.... > > I plan on doing dev work on a AMD E350 based board 'soon'. The E350 is > already supported by coreboot, so I'm planning on getting coreboot > ported for this board and then run U-Boot from coreboot. So we can no > longer assume all coreboot boards will be Intel based. Sounds good! Shall we rename coreboot.h to something like chromebook-x86.h? Regards, Simon > > Regards, > > Graeme _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot