From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: 2.6.28-rc7 acpi error messages Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 17:21:44 +0000 Message-ID: <20081205172144.GA27396@srcf.ucam.org> References: <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580DD52E96@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> <20081203230332.GA26733@srcf.ucam.org> <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580DD52F0F@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> <20081203233557.GA27180@srcf.ucam.org> <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580DD53280@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580DD53927@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580DD53D0B@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> <20081205163752.GA26710@srcf.ucam.org> <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580DD53D76@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:42240 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751805AbYLERVw (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Dec 2008 12:21:52 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D8308580DD53D76@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Moore, Robert" Cc: "Koornstra, Reinoud" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "Brown, Len" , "Lin, Ming M" , "Zhao, Yakui" On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 08:58:39AM -0800, Moore, Robert wrote: > >> 1) Use the RSDT instead of the XSDT and automatically get the "correct" > >FADT with no 64-bit register definitions. > >> > >> 2) Use the XSDT as is done today, but use the 32-bit values instead of > >the 64-bit values in the extended FADT. > > > What we really want to know is what does windows do, (1), or (2). So far I haven't managed to find any machines that have differing values in the version 1 FADT and the 32-bit values of the version 2 one, so it's difficult to know. Best bet would probably be a qemu setup that feeds different values for this - I think some people in Intel had something like this for some previous testing?