Re: [flashrom] [PATCH] be more refined regarding DMI chassis types
Op 26-7-2011 1:22, Stefan Tauner schreef:
we had broken laptops in the past that were not detected as such because their DMI chassis-type was either undefined/out-of-spec, or set to 'other' or 'unknown'.
Does Flashrom use a list of "known mobile hardware" (either chipset, processor or videocard) to recognise a machine as laptop? Intel seems to have a lot of 'M' stuff (ICH9M for example).
On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 01:44:08 +0200 Bernd Blaauw <bblaauw@home.nl> wrote:
Op 26-7-2011 1:22, Stefan Tauner schreef:
we had broken laptops in the past that were not detected as such because their DMI chassis-type was either undefined/out-of-spec, or set to 'other' or 'unknown'.
Does Flashrom use a list of "known mobile hardware" (either chipset, processor or videocard) to recognise a machine as laptop? Intel seems to have a lot of 'M' stuff (ICH9M for example).
no we don't (yet). there are also some desktop-like boards (htpc, embedded) that use mobile chipsets. latest llano boards are one example i think. basically DMI should provide that list of "known mobile hardware", if the bios authors would do their job. :) -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner
On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 02:14:19 +0200 Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner@student.tuwien.ac.at> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jul 2011 01:44:08 +0200 Bernd Blaauw <bblaauw@home.nl> wrote:
Op 26-7-2011 1:22, Stefan Tauner schreef:
we had broken laptops in the past that were not detected as such because their DMI chassis-type was either undefined/out-of-spec, or set to 'other' or 'unknown'.
Does Flashrom use a list of "known mobile hardware" (either chipset, processor or videocard) to recognise a machine as laptop? Intel seems to have a lot of 'M' stuff (ICH9M for example).
no we don't (yet). there are also some desktop-like boards (htpc, embedded) that use mobile chipsets. latest llano boards are one example i think. basically DMI should provide that list of "known mobile hardware", if the bios authors would do their job. :)
that said, what we really want to know is not if they are mobile devices, but if they are safe to flash i.e. if there is not embedded controller that gets in the way etc. (see http://flashrom.org/Laptops). so with ongoing efforts to support ECs better, the need to protect users will fade slowly (wishful thinking here, but you get the point :). -- Kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Stefan Tauner
participants (2)
-
Bernd Blaauw -
Stefan Tauner