On 08/09/2016 03:57 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Alexander,
On 9 August 2016 at 00:48, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote:
Am 08.08.2016 um 23:44 schrieb Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>:
Hi Alexander,
On 8 August 2016 at 08:06, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote:
We generate a few tables on x86 today that really can be used on ARM just
the same. One such example is the SMBIOS table, which people use with tools
like "dmidecode" to identify which hardware they are running on.
We're slowly growing needs to collect serial numbers from various devices
on ARM and SMBIOS seems the natural choice. So this patch set moves the
current SMBIOS generation into generic code and adds serial number exposure
to it.
Shouldn't we use device tree? Why would an ARM device use SMBIOS?
Mostly because SBBR dictates it and every ARM server platform out there
provides SMBIOS tables ;).
Also, both describe very different things. At least I have never seen things like
"The chassy of this server has 2 power connectors and is blue" in device tree.
So there is no DT binding for this information? Does this mean that
U-Boot on ARM needs to pass information through just 'sitting in RAM
somewhere' like x86?
I don't think there's a non-EFI way on ARM to pass this through at all,
correct. That's nothing new though - things like KASLR also depend on EFI.
Alex
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
