[coreboot] [Fwd: Re: Contact Intel]
Richard M Stallman
rms at gnu.org
Fri May 2 23:13:12 CEST 2008
> If the "proprietary low-level chipset initialization code" is in ROM
> on the chips that it initializes, then it is tolerable. (It might as
> well be circuits on that chip.) Otherwise, it is insufficient unless
> made complete.
None of the current mainstream x86 board manufacturers uses real ROMs
We may be partly miscommunicating, talking about different questions.
I'm talking about where we should draw the line of what's acceptable.
What is done in any particular product is a different question. Both
questions are important, but they are different.
If memory is physically writable, but is never updated once users get
the product, that is more or less equivalent to ROM in my view. Thus,
an EEPROM in a chip (or in a device) that contains the code to
initialize the chip (or device) is tolerable if people treat it as a
ISTR that it was necessary for free BIOSes to run some initialization
code for the video card which is stored on the video card. Is that
correct? Is this still necessary? If so, it is an example of what
I am talking about.
More information about the coreboot