[coreboot] libpayload: CMOS / BCD functions

Peter Stuge peter at stuge.se
Sat Mar 29 02:26:35 CET 2008

On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 08:42:41AM -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote:
> > I vote for nvram, too, especially if we plan going to non-x86
> > architectures again. CMOS is really an odd term, I think it got
> > molded by the legacy bios vendors over the years.
> On the other hand, CMOS is the agreed upon term for x86 platforms -
> it sounds stupid to our ears, but we're not typical users.  I would
> stick with CMOS.

I prefer to educate users rather than bending around a bad habit.

> Regardless of where people think they are going to take coreboot (I
> have serious doubts about the usefulness of coreboot on other
> architectures, especially the ones being bandied about on the email
> list), we need to remember that coreboot is targeted at x86, and
> thats where all of its users and potential users will come from for
> the near future.

I don't agree at all that coreboot is targeted exclusively at x86.
If other architectures can use new bootcode like the PC then I would
love for coreboot to be that new bootcode.

Yes, today it is all x86, but if the hardware can be used in other
architectures then the software should as well.

In a few desktop machine generations, when Windows has been better
abstracted, the PC arch will linger no more.

AMD/NatSemi already threw it out with the Geode arch.

I think we'll have better code in v4 if we already keep other archs
in mind. (Not jump through hoops to befriend them, but just keep them
in mind.)


More information about the coreboot mailing list