On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 9:32 AM, ron minnich <rminnich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 6:37 AM, Peter Stuge
ron minnich wrote:
pose the question absent any thought to what
might happen at some
I think coreboot has had BY FAR enough of thoughtless action.
So I'll rephrase.
"pose the question absent a bunch of bootless speculation about what
might happen at some future time?"
BTW, on reflection, I'm fine with http://review.coreboot.org/#/c/7149/
Based on the community feedback and this email discussion, isolation
of the PI and AGESA source is the preferred development path. While we
were trying for a common interface, it is not necessary. I concede
that AMD has not contributed updates to AGESA releases and has had
poor community interactions. It should be more beneficial to the
development of coreboot to fix the long standing issues in the code. I
have removed my NACK(-2) on 7149 and it should be un-abandoned. Thanks
to each of you to your contributions and improvements to coreboot.