[coreboot] A case for branching AGESA
mr.nuke.me at gmail.com
Sun Nov 1 21:29:43 CET 2015
On 11/01/2015 12:49 AM, Patrick Georgi wrote:
> Just a note: the only reason why current Intel fares better
I didn't say Intel fares better. FSP is on my (rather long) hitlist, but
that's not within the scope of this discussion.
>> 7 min vs 20 min on empty ccache, and 2 min vs 6 min on primed ccache.
>> Those are speedups of 2x to 3x.
> Thank you for doing the measurements.
Thank you for creating the 'what-jenkins-does' make target.
>> Patch trains from google and other contributions to non-AGESA code gain a 2x to 3x
>> speedup in server time, while users of AGESA can continue to contribute
>> and work on the codebase.
> ... and diverge...
And that's expected. Convergence is a dream. AGESA boards use BuildOpts
for configuration, and not much Kconfig/devicetree.cb, versus most other
boards in the tree. Except for VX900 and sandybridge, every chipset
implements its own SPD parsing routines. I can go on and on. Even within
one branch, significant divergence exists, so non-divergence is a moot
More information about the coreboot