Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 10:58:56 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: mlfbsd@ci0.org Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: progress on the adi pronghorn metro board Message-ID: <20070322.105856.-1337019401.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <20070322152708.GA79016@ci0.org> References: <20070322080335.GA52745@zibbi.meraka.csir.co.za> <46029AF5.20903@errno.com> <20070322152708.GA79016@ci0.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <20070322152708.GA79016@ci0.org>
Olivier Houchard <mlfbsd@ci0.org> writes:
: I think one config file per board is not too much to handle, and detecting
: which board we're currently running can be difficult.
On Linux, the boot loader does all of the detection (usually by being
hard-wired for a board) and passes the result to the kernel... The
one wrinkle that we have is that we often include extra devices via
hints for things on, eg, the IIC bus. Multi-variant hint select isn't
supported.
I agree that auto detection would be hard. Maybe we should at least
print a warning if we are compile for board type 43 and the loader
says we're 25.
It would be especially hard for different cores. All AT91RM9200 would
be doable, if not a bit tedious in spots. All AT91* ARM 9 parts would
be much harder, in part due to the multi-variant hint selection that
would be necessary and in part due to some of the kinkier differences
between the ARM910 core and the ARM926EJS core, not to mention the
while issue of 'do I need this workaround for this bad hunk of silicon
<cough MCI cough> or not'.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070322.105856.-1337019401.imp>