[PATCH] Start unifying ram_check() usage in coreboot

[Uwe Hermann]

See patch.

More patches to further improve this stuff are planned, e.g. to check up
to Top-of-memory, and to make it runtime (CMOS) configurable.

Uwe.

[Stefan Reinauer]

Uwe Hermann wrote:
> See patch.
>
> More patches to further improve this stuff are planned, e.g. to check up
> to Top-of-memory, and to make it runtime (CMOS) configurable.

NACK

I don't think this should be user visible. In fact I think it should be
dropped from all boards once they are working.

The test is bogus and only capable of finding crude coding errors. So
either you're a developer and know how to put the code there,
or you shouldn't know about it.

[Peter Stuge]

Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> NACK

NAK +1.
> I don't think this should be user visible. In fact I think it
> should be dropped from all boards once they are working.

I agree with this.
> The test is bogus and only capable of finding crude coding errors.
> So either you're a developer and know how to put the code there, or
> you shouldn't know about it.

It's also not very nice to have a library function be conditionally
empty depending on configuration. I think it would be better to move
towards fewer lines of code in cache_as_ram_auto.c, not more.

//Peter