On 12.02.2009 16:22, Myles Watson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006@gmx.net wrote:
After lots of cleanups, bugfixes, feature extensions and testing, my diff to add Asus M2A-VM support to coreboot has shrunk almost to zero.
If it weren't for the socket difference, I'd be interested to see if the dbm690t would just work with the Asus changes and only have one target.
Right now I ignore the fact that thermal setup is completely wrong. The machine still boots, though. There are other differences as well.
You're right about the striking similarities between targets, though. I'd really like to have one generic RS690/SB600 board and keep the differences well contained in separate files. My cleanups have been focued on that task.
end end device pci 2.0 on end # PCIE P2P bridge (external graphics) 0x7913
device pci 3.0 off end # PCIE P2P bridge 0x791b
#device pci 3.0 off end # PCIE P2P bridge 0x791b device pci 4.0 on end # PCIE P2P bridge 0x7914 device pci 5.0 on end # PCIE P2P bridge 0x7915 device pci 6.0 on end # PCIE P2P bridge 0x7916@@ -257,9 +257,9 @@ device pci 14.3 on # LPC 0x438d chip superio/ite/it8712f device pnp 2e.0 off # Floppy
io 0x60 = 0x3f0irq 0x70 = 6drq 0x74 = 2
#io 0x60 = 0x3f0#irq 0x70 = 6#drq 0x74 = 2Why does it matter if you comment out settings for a device that's off? Same question for the pci 3.0 device above.
The weird thing is that the board wouldn't boot otherwise. These changes are fairly old, though, so it may be possible that they are no longer needed. It will be a week before I have access to the hardware again.
Regards, Carl-Daniel