[coreboot] [PATCH] Make RAM check configurable via Kconfig

Carl-Daniel Hailfinger c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net
Tue Mar 18 01:51:41 CET 2008

On 17.03.2008 09:21, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
> Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote:
>> On 16.03.2008 23:16, Stefan Reinauer wrote:
>>> ron minnich wrote:
>>>> So, I am curious.
>>>> I see this:
>>>>     ram_check(0, 640 * 1024);
>>>> in a file. Could I be forgiven in thinking that a ram check might be
>>>> done? I realize this is the "linux style" but I have never
>>>> particularly liked it.
>>>> What is wrong with
>>>> #ifdef RAMTEST
>>>>     ram_check(0, 640 * 1024);
>>>> #endif
>>>> What do people prefer? Maybe I am just out of touch.            
>>> This ram test is nothing that a user should ever see. it is left over
>>> development code.
>> Agreed, but at the same time, I'd like to keep this in the code as
>> reference for future porters. Maybe have it depend on
>> CONFIG_PARANOID_CHECKING or something like that?
>> Or we simply comment it out once the board is running perfectly.
> Yes, I agree.

Note: I would put all stuff needed/recommended during porting, but not
recommended/needed for deployment, under this one
would include other checks as well. Multiple config variables are a
recipe for disaster.



More information about the coreboot mailing list