From: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@linux-watchdog.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, Tom Abraham <tabraham@suse.com>
Subject: Re: wdat_wdt: access width inconsistency
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:03:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200211180331.11dbe525@endymion> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200211163753.GK2667@lahna.fi.intel.com>
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:37:53 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 05:25:33PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:59:44 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > If the default timeout is short then that might happen but I think WDAT
> > > spec had some "reasonable" lower limit.
> >
> > Could you please point me to the WDAT specification? Somehow my web
> > search failed to spot it.
>
> You can find it here:
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg463320.aspx
>
> Most of the ACPI related documents not part of the spec itself are
> listed in the following page:
>
> https://uefi.org/acpi
Great, thanks for the info.
As I read the specification, it is mandatory to have a timeout >= 5
minutes *if* the watchdog is enabled at boot time. Otherwise the 5
minutes is only a recommendation. I wouldn't be surprised if some
hardware vendors do not initialize the timeout value and assume the OS
will do it for them. Odds are that Windows does that.
Thanks again,
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-11 17:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-10 10:16 wdat_wdt: access width inconsistency Jean Delvare
2020-02-10 11:23 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-11 13:11 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-11 13:59 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-11 16:25 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-11 16:37 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-11 17:03 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2020-02-12 11:05 ` [PATCH 1/3] ACPICA: Introduce ACPI_ACCESS_BIT_WIDTH() macro Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:05 ` [PATCH 2/3] ACPI / watchdog: Fix gas->access_width usage Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:56 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-12 12:10 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:05 ` [PATCH 3/3] ACPI / watchdog: Set default timeout in probe Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 12:07 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-12 12:13 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:52 ` [PATCH 1/3] ACPICA: Introduce ACPI_ACCESS_BIT_WIDTH() macro Jean Delvare
2020-02-12 12:08 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-11 16:45 ` wdat_wdt: access width inconsistency Guenter Roeck
2020-02-12 10:30 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-12 10:47 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:05 ` Jean Delvare
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200211180331.11dbe525@endymion \
--to=jdelvare@suse.de \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tabraham@suse.com \
--cc=wim@linux-watchdog.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.