On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 02:50:52PM -0600, Jeffrey Bastian wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 01:50:15PM -0500, Masayoshi Mizuma wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 09:37:12AM +0100, Karel Zak wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2020 at 11:19:08PM -0600, Jeremy Linton wrote: > > > > I don't agree with this, I think the hard coded table should be the first > > > > authority on the manufacture/part number lists. That is because SMBIOS isn't > > > > available on a fairly large number of arm systems, and on systems where it > > > > does exist, it suffers from the same kinds of problems that exist on many > > > > !arm machines. Its not particularly a reliable source of information. > > > > > > > > So, maybe if you have a situation where the SMBIOS information is more > > > > correct than the hardcoded tables, maybe its a good idea to create a new > > > > line? > > > > > > > > > > > > Aka: > > > > > > > > Vendor Id: ARM > > > > Model Name: Cortex-A57 > > > > BIOS Name: JoeSmithsCore > > > > > > I like this idea. > > > > Yeah, it's s great idea! > > SMBIOS Type4 also has Vendor Id (Processor Manufacturer), > > so the following is better? > > > > Vendor Id: ARM > > Model Name: Cortex-A57 > > BIOS Vendor Id: Foobar > > BIOS Model Name: JoeSmithsCore > > > > Jeff, does the above idea work for your case? X-Gene(eMAG) will be: > > > > Vendor Id: APM > > Model Name: X-Gene > > BIOS Vendor Id: Ampere(TM) > > BIOS Model Name: eMAG > > > This is perfect. I like the idea of showing both instead of preferring > one over the other. Sounds like a plan. I'd like to merge my topic/lscpu branch to the master branch tomorrow (or on Friday), the ideal solution will be to continue with this new code. Karel -- Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx> http://karelzak.blogspot.com
