[coreboot] is ACPI a superset of _MP_ or not?

Stefan Reinauer stepan at coresystems.de
Mon Feb 11 01:06:46 CET 2008


ron minnich wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2008 12:22 PM, Peter Stuge <peter at stuge.se> wrote:
>
>   
>> Does anyone know how OLPC are doing with the device tree in x86
>> Linux? Seems that we want that (or another easy way to hand over
>> interrupt routing info to the kernel) pretty badly.
>>     
>
> This came up a while back. I tried to talk to one OLPC person about
> it, w.r.t. using OF tree instead of ACPI, but the reponse was not at
> all encouraging. It seemed you had to buy the whole package, including
> an open firmware bios and callbacks, or you could not really use the
> OF tree. I can find the email if anyone cares.
>   

This is complementary to what uboot and ePAPR do. The whole embedded 
powerpc scene is shifting to using an OF tree without an actual open 
firmware system running. Remember: This is where "dtc" came from. So 
yes, of course it is possible.

> I think we should just continue to use _MP_.
>   
On those platforms limited enough so they can still cope with that and 
on the other hand do not need to care for power consumption, yes. 
definitely. _MP_ is always good as a quick hack of getting things to work.



-- 
coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br.
      Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613
Email: info at coresystems.dehttp://www.coresystems.de/
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Freiburg • HRB 7656
Geschäftsführer: Stefan Reinauer • Ust-IdNr.: DE245674866


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/attachments/20080211/a1a4c1d3/attachment.sig>


More information about the coreboot mailing list