Quoting Corey Osgood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Quoting Uwe Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> >>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 03:54:18PM +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2008 at 09:42:00AM -0500, Corey Osgood wrote: >>>> >>>>> Peter Stuge wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I think we need to make it configurable. >>>>>> >>>>> I don't like that. With a factory bios, you expect the correct >>>>> microcode update for your CPU to be present, no matter what CPU you >>>>> put in a socket. >>>>> >>>> (Actually no, not always.) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> We should be able to do the same. >>>>> >>>> I agree, but we should also try to be even more flexible. I think we >>>> should allow inclusion of 0<=n<=all microcode updates. Definately an >>>> advanced option, but still. >>>> >>> Yep, that's what I meant. It's fine if the default is "all microcode >>> updates", but there should be an option for advanced users to only use >>> the one(s) you really want or need in order to save time and space. >>> >>> >>> Uwe. >>> >>> >> That makes perfect sense.....I like the advanced option idea:-) >> >> Thanks - Joe > > This seems like it would get very messy, very quickly. The only way I > can come up with to do it is #if's for every single ID, perhaps in some > intel_custom folder, so it doesn't make a mess of the existing stuff. > > Anyways, I'll get on top of testing this weekend, I have slot 1 (440zx), > socket 370 (i810), and socket 479 (i830) boards I can test with, > assuming they all still work. If those work, I'll bet the farm that the > rest of them do. Everything passes abuild, btw. > > -Corey > Yeh, even though it is a good idea it probibly would complicate things alot. For now it may be better to just commit a piece at a time for each processor tested. I'm really interested in how the socket 479 (Pentium M) testing goes. Let us know:-)
Thanks - Joe -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
