On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Jonathan A. Kollasch <jakll...@kollasch.net > wrote:
> > > Put it this way, any payload that presents a BIOS or CSM is going to need > to populate the BDA where software expects to find it (at 0x400). > > OK, but ... I've been finding platforms lately which don't have lots of these tables, including ones which no longer have _MP_. They all count on ACPI. I'm not yet convinced we need the BDA -- yes, yes, for compliance, I understand we do; but I wonder how many OSes can survive with it's not there. So much of the information in there is what we used to call "legacy crap.". I know that we did not set up BDA for the first six years or so of this project, in part because I kept trying to avoid inheriting all this historical gunk. So I'm curious to see what would happen were it not there. That said, I do turn off paging before I jump to payload, so it might be possible to work around this nonsense. So many little tables. What a mess! ron
-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot