Subrata Banik has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/33859 )
Change subject: Kconfig: Enable RAMPAYLOAD for x86 ......................................................................
Patch Set 3:
Patch Set 3:
It's a huge fundamental change you are pushing through with RAMPAYLOAD.
I guess this feature has been review through during initial patch set and this patch just to fix below mentioned problem.
I am not so happy about this being submitted with the little discussion review it saw. Mostly I feel some amount of boilerplate KConfig variables has been added just before release and without documentation. Other people may feel otherwise who have thoroughly reviewed this work...
Why is RAMPAYLOAD=y correct default? Isn't a board still initially developed to go through the standard ramstage, or does HAVE_RAMPAYLOAD=y imply that RAMPAYLOAD=n for a board might not even work?
does HAVE_RAMPAYLOAD=y imply that RAMPAYLOAD=n for a board might not even work? Right now i'm seeing this case only and this patch to fix this problem. HAVE_RAMPAYLOAD=y should imply RAMPAYLOAD=y so avoid fallback/ramstage even complied and packed into cbfs.
I'm not sure how i have missed this to check when initially I was trying to build coreboot without ramstage. i can remember now, initially i only had RAMPAYLOAD as master kconfig then Nico has added HAVE_RAMPAYLOAD, Right now i'm seeing although mainboard do select HAVE_RAMPAYLOAD but still RAMPAYLOAD=n.