On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Mitch Bradley <wmb@firmworks.com> wrote:
quoted text
>
>
>
>  Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Mitch Bradley <wmb@firmworks.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >  Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > how about changing to ofw_32.c?
> > > >
> > > > YH
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >  Is your suggestion to change the filename from "ofw.c" to "ofw_32.c"?
> That
> > > seems like a good idea to me.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > BTW,  why olpc need OFW runtime service?
> > why not just put the info in in ram with some signiture, so
> > kernel/util just need to loot at the table if needed?
> >
> >
>
>  In SPARC land, at least on SunOS and Solaris, it was very convenient for
> debugging to interrupt the OS with Stop-A and use OFW to inspect the system
> state.  That was especially handy for live crash analysis.  Dumps are useful
> as far as they go, but they often fail to capture detailed I/O device state.
>
>  I was hoping to do that on x86 too.  So far we (OLPC) haven't implemented a
> sysrq hook to enter OFW, but I haven't given up hope yet.  It doesn't cost
> much to leave OFW around, but once you decide to eject it, you can't easily
> get it back.

geode is using SMI to simulate the pci conf space, wonder that could be problem.

later you have 64 runtime service for 64 platform like UEFI?

YH
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/