On 11.09.2010 01:39, Peter Stuge wrote:
Marc Jones wrote:
-static void mahogany_enable(device_t dev) +static void kino_enable(device_t dev) {
- printk(BIOS_INFO, "Mainboard MAHOGANY Enable. dev=0x%p\n", dev);
- printk(BIOS_INFO, "Mainboard Kino Enable. dev=0x%p\n", dev);
#if (CONFIG_GFXUMA == 1) msr_t msr, msr2; @@ -166,6 +121,6 @@ }
struct chip_operations mainboard_ops = {
- CHIP_NAME("AMD MAHOGANY Mainboard")
- .enable_dev = mahogany_enable,
- CHIP_NAME("IEI Kino-780AM2 Mainboard")
- .enable_dev = kino_enable,
};
Could the mainboard enable function reuse the CHIP_NAME somehow, or maybe both should just use CONFIG_MAINBOARD_PART_NUMBER ?
I once had such a patch, but I think it was rejected for two reasons: - grepping is more difficult because you have to match in two stages - building multi-mainboard images means CONFIG_MAINBOARD_PART_NUMBER is not really meaningful.
That said, I still support the idea and would be willing to update my patch.
Regards, Carl-Daniel