From Paul's comment, I get the feeling that because the Zen processor is so different, it might not be accepted in the coreboot codebase. Why else do we need to talk about it on the mailing list.
I think you got caught in the crossfire here. He replied
to my comment, so I assume he meant that I (or we) should
take the commit-style discussion to the mailing list.
Actually, to separate it from your commits.
I go to extra effort to break everything down into small pieces that can be easily reviewed, and I feel attacked for that.
Your effort is much appreciated. No matter how much I lament
about the copy-first, it would be obviously worse if you'd
push only two commits copy+adapt.
We need to pick a method for accepting new chips and go with it. If you want whole files that are finished, that's fine with me. If you want to force the development to be done elsewhere, I'm fine with that too.
I'm not sure if I understand this correctly. You seem to
say that pushing whole files implies that you have to first
finish the whole development and then break it apart again?
Is that it?
I guess that might be true for a small, core part of the
code, but most likely not for the whole 11k LOC. Maybe
I'm wrong here but the code looks too well organized to
be hard to break apart, or rather to pick one topic after
another from it.
While I do work at Google, I'm a part of the coreboot community. I'm working at Google BECAUSE i'm a part of the community. I understand the issues. I don't like the blobs and lack of documentation either. Although it may still be going in the wrong direction I'm actively working to try to improve things.
Um, I'm confused that you bring your employment and blobs
into this. Did sb. (I?) bring that up somewhere and forgot?
Or is there an argument? If you wouldn't be a part of the
community (which is great that you are btw.) and working
for Google, this discussion would be less unexpected? I'm
really puzzled here.
1 comment:
File src/soc/amd/picasso/acpi.c:
Patch Set #1, Line 72: void acpi_create_fadt(acpi_fadt_t *fadt, acpi_facs_t *facs, void *dsdt)
sorry, maybe my question is out of topic. […]
The version in arch/x86/ is guarded by an #if.
To view, visit change 32407. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.