Am 16.05.2011 01:42, schrieb Peter Stuge:
Talking to a lot of visitors at LinuxTag it is absolutely clear that this is an example of what should actually be an NVRAM option.
Do we have some policy for where to place an option? I don't think we do. Do we want to create one?
My idea for a long term plan: - move most stuff to NVRAM - allow defaults in NVRAM config (per chip component) - allow boards to override these defaults - allow boards to lock down options (so they're compiled out in our code and present as "hard coded values" in cbtable) - probably/eventually: allow user to change defaults/lock them down in Kconfig
That way we can make everything flexible, yet lock down options that make no sense (eg. disable IDE/SATA option on boards with IDE function on chip but no connector on board). The hard part will be (again) how to extend Kconfig, and I guess this will require automatic Kconfig file creation (ie. Makefile magic). But since this is the last step (right after Infrastructure Projects/CMOS), this can wait.
Patrick