On 03/21/2014 05:28 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:33 PM, mrnuke mr.nuke.me@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, March 22, 2014 03:56:46 AM Andrew Wu wrote:
Yes, that is right. DMP/Vortex86EX has no MTRR. So it maybe a problem if without romcc. :(
Is there any way whatsoever to temporarily use the cache as SRAM?
when we did the first real CAR work MTRRs were not needed. I'm not sure if they would be on the vortex. We might want to test the very early CAR code and see how it goes. It's actually quite simple.
It would be nice to make sure modern hardware uses modern infrastructure.
Also, let's just take it a little easy here. These are proposals, nothing is ever perfect on first release, the world is not ending, Google is not showing up at coreboot.org in skimasks and unmarked uniforms ...
Damn! I was hoping to steal some ski gear from them.
I think a fork would harm everyone
Sure, if you stab the person hard enough.
and would be destructive of our common goals. Please remember that we are all trying to do the right thing, and our different situations give us different perspectives.
When Stefan sounds so serious, it's hard to tell whether he is just proposing, or announcing changes. Remember, he's the guy that can port a new board with his eyes closed [1]. People take him too seriously sometimes.
Nobody is coming in here with bad motives. We're just trying to muddle our way through the many demands of different stakeholders now that coreboot, thanks to the efforts of some pretty dedicated people, has become a runaway success.
The bad-ness or good-ness of motives is relative. Note that I'm not using "bad" in the sense of "evil". Let's look at the six gatekeeper idea: * Easier for commercial entities to upstream code, therefore faster progress for coreboot (good motive). (a) * Easier for commercial entities to upstream code, therefore we can get lazy even if code quality drops (bad motive). (b)
So, in your 15 years of doing this, which option should prevail?
Alex