[coreboot] Add coreboot storage driver

[Aaron Durbin]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Julius Werner <jwerner at chromium.org> wrote:
> +1 for preferring a single-core concurrency model. This would be much more
> likely to be reusable for other platforms, and much simpler to maintain in
> the long run (way less platform-specific details to keep track of and figure
> out again and again for every new chipset). You CAR problems would become
> much more simple... just make sure the scheduler structures get migrated
> together with the rest of the globals and it should work fine out of the
> box.

FWIW, there's no coherency in CAR. It's per building block of the
hardware units -- much like multiple nodes in AMD K* systems.
Migrating CAR not necessarily a simple solution, but I'm not convinced
we need multiple cores executing with CAR as a backing store.

>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:31 PM, ron minnich <rminnich at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:17 AM Nico Huber <nico.h at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Another idea just popped up: Performing "background" tasks in udelay()
>>> / mdelay() implementations ;)
>>
>>
>> that is adurbin's threading model. I really like it.
>>
>> A lot of times, concurrency will get you just as far as ||ism without the
>> nastiness.
>>
>> But if we're going to make a full up kernel for rom, my suggestion is we
>> could start with a real kernel, perhaps linux. We could then rename coreboot
>> to, say, LinuxBIOS.
>>
>> ron
>>
>> --
>> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
>> https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
>
>
>
> --
> coreboot mailing list: coreboot at coreboot.org
> https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot