Nico Huber has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730 )
Change subject: util/autoport: correct build errors of produced files ......................................................................
Patch Set 2:
(5 comments)
This is full of unrelated cosmetic changes that need a commit message. Please split.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/azalia.go File util/autoport/azalia.go:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/azalia.go@a55 PS2, Line 55: Audio controller What is fixed by removing this? Isn't it just an informational string?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/bd82x6x.go File util/autoport/bd82x6x.go:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/bd82x6x.go@a2... PS2, Line 279: PCI- Why drop this?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/main.go File util/autoport/main.go:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/main.go@821 PS2, Line 821: fmt.Fprintf(bi, "Flashrom support: %s\n", FlashROMSupport) What is the reason for the changes here?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/sandybridge.g... File util/autoport/sandybridge.go:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/sandybridge.g... PS2, Line 137: RegisterPCI(0x8086, id, GenericVGA{GenericPCI{Comment: "VGA controller"}}) Why?
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/37730/2/util/autoport/sandybridge.g... PS2, Line 15: `) Hmmmm, I wonder if we should drop this. There is no reason to run the VBIOS within coreboot anymore. (To gain better compatibility, one would have to run it in SeaBIOS anyway, which has its own handlers.)