[patch][v2] serengeti_cheetah_fam10 abuild

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 25.04.2008 22:21, Marc Jones wrote:
> Change abuild ROM_IMAGE_SIZE to match the standard s_c_fam10 Config.lb.
> The FAM10 code takes up more space in the uncompressed "ROMCC" portion
> of coreboot. Also, It is still growing as features are added.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Jones
> Index: coreboot-v2/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb
>
> --- coreboot-v2.orig/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb	2008-04-25 13:47:58.000000000 -0600
> +++ coreboot-v2/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb	2008-04-25 13:52:24.000000000 -0600
> @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
>
> romimage "fallback" 
>    option USE_FALLBACK_IMAGE=1
> option ROM_IMAGE_SIZE=0x22200
> option ROM_IMAGE_SIZE=0x3f000
> option COREBOOT_EXTRA_VERSION=".0-fallback"
> payload __PAYLOAD__
>
> end

Can we delay this until the uninlining patch has been committed? That
way, we can find out about size effects of uninlining.

Regards,
Carl-Daniel

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 25.04.2008 23:22, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> On 25.04.2008 22:21, Marc Jones wrote:
> > Change abuild ROM_IMAGE_SIZE to match the standard s_c_fam10 Config.lb.
> > The FAM10 code takes up more space in the uncompressed "ROMCC" portion
> > of coreboot. Also, It is still growing as features are added.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marc Jones
> > Index: coreboot-v2/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb
> >
> > --- coreboot-v2.orig/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb	2008-04-25 13:47:58.000000000 -0600
> > +++ coreboot-v2/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb	2008-04-25 13:52:24.000000000 -0600
> > @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
> >
> > romimage "fallback" 
> >    option USE_FALLBACK_IMAGE=1
> > option ROM_IMAGE_SIZE=0x22200
> > option ROM_IMAGE_SIZE=0x3f000
> > option COREBOOT_EXTRA_VERSION=".0-fallback"
> > payload __PAYLOAD__
> >
> > end
>
> Can we delay this until the uninlining patch has been committed? That
> way, we can find out about size effects of uninlining.

The uninlining patch changed code size by three bytes. Oh well... we can
still work out all those bloat problems in v3.

Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

[Marc Jones]

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> On 25.04.2008 23:22, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
> > On 25.04.2008 22:21, Marc Jones wrote:
> > > Change abuild ROM_IMAGE_SIZE to match the standard s_c_fam10 Config.lb.
> > > The FAM10 code takes up more space in the uncompressed "ROMCC" portion
> > > of coreboot. Also, It is still growing as features are added.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Marc Jones
> > > Index: coreboot-v2/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb
> > >
> > > --- coreboot-v2.orig/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb	2008-04-25 13:47:58.000000000 -0600
> > > +++ coreboot-v2/targets/amd/serengeti_cheetah_fam10/Config-abuild.lb	2008-04-25 13:52:24.000000000 -0600
> > > @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
> > >
> > > romimage "fallback" 
> > >    option USE_FALLBACK_IMAGE=1
> > > option ROM_IMAGE_SIZE=0x22200
> > > option ROM_IMAGE_SIZE=0x3f000
> > > option COREBOOT_EXTRA_VERSION=".0-fallback"
> > > payload __PAYLOAD__
> > >
> > > end
> >
> > Can we delay this until the uninlining patch has been committed? That
> > way, we can find out about size effects of uninlining.
>
> The uninlining patch changed code size by three bytes. Oh well... we can
> still work out all those bloat problems in v3.
>
> Acked-by: Carl-Daniel Hailfinger

r3267

Thanks,
Marc