Change in coreboot[master]: soc/intel/common/{block, pch}: Move smihandler common functions into ...
Subrata Banik has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/26138 )
Change subject: soc/intel/common/{block, pch}: Move smihandler common functions into common code ......................................................................
Patch Set 38:
(1 comment)
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/26138/38/src/soc/intel/common/pch/s... File src/soc/intel/common/pch/smm/smihandler.c:
PS38:
get_smm_save_state_ops function returns "em64t100_smm_ops" for APL/GLK and cores are using em64t101_smm_ops
Can a weak implementation of get_smm_save_state_ops() be provided in soc/intel/common/block/smm/smihandler.c that returns &em64t101_smm_ops by default and APL/GLK can provide their override?
Done
for APL/GLK below macro names are not same with cores SLP_SMI_STS, APM_SMI_STS. All small cores are using consistent macro name <something>_STS in pm.h
Can all the APL/GLK *_STS bit definitions be updated to match what core does?
Done
Was thinking why we need to rename macros in APL/GLK to align with core platform. hence this file exist to maintain common core platform functions rather moving into common/block
This file is adding more confusion in my opinion. This file is like common for core but not really for atom.
True, this is more like core common code based on PCH
Wouldn't it be better to align core and atom if this code really has to be moved into soc/intel/common? and just have one single place for all smihandler routines?
moved
-
Subrata Banik (Code Review)