[U-Boot] [PATCH 20/20] x86: config: Enable AHCI support for coreboot

[Simon Glass]

Hi Graeme,

On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Graeme Russ <graeme.russ at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Oct 23, 2012 4:42 PM, "Simon Glass" <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Graeme,
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:38 PM, Graeme Russ <graeme.russ at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Simon,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>> >> Hi Graeme,
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Graeme Russ <graeme.russ at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> Hi Simon,
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>> >>>> Enable AHCI driver for Intel SATA devices.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
>> >>>> ---
>> >>>>  include/configs/coreboot.h |   21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>> >>>>  1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> diff --git a/include/configs/coreboot.h b/include/configs/coreboot.h
>> >>>> index 3df085b..968a9c5 100644
>> >>>> --- a/include/configs/coreboot.h
>> >>>> +++ b/include/configs/coreboot.h
>> >>>> @@ -45,6 +45,27 @@
>> >>>>  #undef CONFIG_WATCHDOG
>> >>>>  #undef CONFIG_HW_WATCHDOG
>> >>>>
>> >>>> +/* SATA AHCI storage */
>> >>>> +
>> >>>> +#define CONFIG_SCSI_AHCI
>> >>>> +
>> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SCSI_AHCI
>> >>>> +#define CONFIG_SATA_INTEL              1
>> >>>> +#define CONFIG_SCSI_DEV_LIST           {PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, \
>> >>>> +                       PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_NM10_AHCI},       \
>> >>>> +       {PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,           \
>> >>>> +                       PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_AHCI_MOBILE},
>> >>>> \
>> >>>> +       {PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, \
>> >>>> +
>> >>>> PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_COUGARPOINT_AHCI_SERIES6}, \
>> >>>> +       {PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,           \
>> >>>> +                       PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_PANTHERPOINT_AHCI_MOBILE}
>> >>>
>> >>> This implies every coreboot board is Intel. When you start to
>> >>> introduce hardware specific U-Boot components, you need to introduce a
>> >>> board specific config file.
>> >>>
>> >>> Would it be better to have a CONFIG_X86_COREBOOT and a coreboot 'SoC'
>> >>> and no coreboot board?
>> >>
>> >> I am not sure about using the SOC - after all we might need that
>> >> concept soon on x86. Maybe we should create a new board config that
>> >> includes coreboot.h?
>> >
>> > SoC was the wrong abstraction - I think coreboot library is better
>> > (see my email I just sent)
>>
>> Yes, ok. I can do a patch to move it, or do you want to?
>
> I think it would be best for you to move it.
>
> Presumably
>> this would come in after the patches that are already pending on the
>> mailing list?
>
> Yes. No big hurry
>
>>
>> >
>> >> Having said that I'm not sure how important it is right now. So far,
>> >> coreboot.h is actually a particular class of boards, all Intel based.
>> >> We can name it whatever we want when we actually have other boards
>> >> which are coreboot but not Intel. Up to you....
>> >
>> > I plan on doing dev work on a AMD E350 based board 'soon'. The E350 is
>> > already supported by coreboot, so I'm planning on getting coreboot
>> > ported for this board and then run U-Boot from coreboot. So we can no
>> > longer assume all coreboot boards will be Intel based.
>>
>> Sounds good! Shall we rename coreboot.h to something like
>> chromebook-x86.h?
>
> Even better would be to use the model name (which I assume would make the
> x86 tag redundant)

Well, the model is very device-specific. So far as U-Boot cares all
the models are basically the same. What differences there are are
taken care of by device tree differences. This is try on ARM for
machines which share the some SOC, and true for basically all x86
platforms.

Regards,
Simon

>
> Regards,
>
> Graeme