Eric has pointed out to me that we need a tree to properly describe the new complex systems such as K8. The current config language is not sufficient to do the job.
I've been thinking about mods to the language that preserve the current simplicity for the vast majority of motherboards out there, while at the same time allowing a complex hierarchy to be described. I think I have an idea.
Currently we say things like this:
southbridge vendor/model ...
superio vendor/model ...
This syntax is actually sufficient for something like 95% of the motherboards we need to support. But what if we have
southbridge vendor/model ... southbridge vendor/model ...
superio vendor/model ...
which southbridge is the superio on?
Here is my proposed change
southbridge vendor/model[=<tag>] [parent=<tag>] ...
superio vendor/model[=<tag>] [parent=<tag>] ...
(note this syntax applies to all the types of parts)
Consider the simple case. The one southbridge is given a default tag of southbridge, with the default parent of northbridge. The superio is given the default tag of superio, with the default parent of southbridge. It all works.
Consider the hard case.
southbridge intel/xyz=sb1 ... southbridge intel/xyz=sb2 ...
superio NSC/abs parent=sb1 ...
If there is more than one northbridge, then we can set the parent tag for the southbridge.
This syntax allows arbitrary trees to be described; it is as simple in the base case as the current one; and it should be fairly straightforward to implement. Computing the path to a given part is then easy.
Some flexibility in the tags should be possible. The tag could allude to an actual tag, or a part type (southbridge), or a part vendor/manufacturer pair (intel/xyz). As long as the tag specifies something unique, it should be acceptable.
Another way to do it is this:
southbridge [tag=<tag>] [parent=<tag>]
any preference for syntax?
Comments?
ron