Reworking the attribute is actually causing a huge pain in the ass with relocations it looks like. I'm going to see if i can have the amdk8 MCT code return the dimm_mask information back to the board via sdram_initialize().
I could either just have sdram_initialize() return a merged version of dimm_mask which would limit the number of dimms supported, or I could pass in an additional non-static 'population' structure which i think may be better.
Any thoughts?.. I'm going to modify my stuff to pass in a new structure in the meantime..
-san
On 10/20/05, Ronald G Minnich rminnich@lanl.gov wrote:
San Mehat wrote:
1- I dont think we should be worried about names that are too long. I'd much rather have a long name than a non-descriptive one (or in this case a totally misleading one) 2- Changing the attribute shouldn't be that big of a deal. 3 - dimm_mask isn't exposed to the mainboard layer which is where we need it.
As for 'why we need it', we have a post card which displays the DIMM population map on boot for our ops guys...
- I'm ok with long names. These are rarely typed, more often read, and
should be correct. 2. yeah 3. yeah, expose as much info as we can. We're a bios.
can you send us a diff in -u format so we can take a look?
ron