Attention is currently required from: Tarun Tuli, Jérémy Compostella, Sumeet R Pawnikar, Eric Lai.
Subrata Banik has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/74380 )
Change subject: soc/intel/meteoerlake: set power limits dynamically ......................................................................
Patch Set 4:
(1 comment)
Patchset:
PS4:
Cf. https://partnerissuetracker.corp.google.com/issues/262499722 comment#16
This is not proper to give `-1` in open source code review by guarding something in access control database. (not all reviewers in coreboot has access to partner database). JFYI
if you have some justification to block this patch, please be open here.
In summary, we can't rely on Intel FSP default programming while working on coreboot. We always have to find ways to ensure we bring things in open and don't hide behind FSP door.
Let me put my concerns here as well
The reason, I'm not okay with too much dependency over FSP is that the fact, FSP code and default value can change any time to address the concern from other customers which might create problem for us.
Additionally, FSP API mode is never boot tested at FSP side hence, how do someone know the impact of changes certain value on the chromeos devices?
-
Subrata Banik (Code Review)