From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:33:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A329F8D.70906@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090612192830.16224709@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
On 06/12/09 11:28, Alan Cox wrote:
>> + if (error == -EINVAL) {
>> + /*
>> + * The ACPI tables themselves were malformed.
>> + * Dell Precision Workstation 410, 610 come here.
>> + */
>> + printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX
>> + "Invalid BIOS MADT, disabling ACPI\n");
>> + disable_acpi();
>> + } else {
>>
>
> This seems a very bad model. On todays systems turning off ACPI renders
> them basically useless. If the MADT is bogus its far better to pray that
> they rest of the ACPI is mostly sound and continue by ignoring the only
> dodgy table.
>
I didn't make any change there; I just preserved the original behaviour
of stopping all ACPI parsing when it returned -EINVAL (with a slightly
more helpful comment). My change was to make it continue to the I/O
APICs if it returned something else (ie, -ENODEV).
J
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:33:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A329F8D.70906@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090612192830.16224709@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
On 06/12/09 11:28, Alan Cox wrote:
>> + if (error == -EINVAL) {
>> + /*
>> + * The ACPI tables themselves were malformed.
>> + * Dell Precision Workstation 410, 610 come here.
>> + */
>> + printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX
>> + "Invalid BIOS MADT, disabling ACPI\n");
>> + disable_acpi();
>> + } else {
>>
>
> This seems a very bad model. On todays systems turning off ACPI renders
> them basically useless. If the MADT is bogus its far better to pray that
> they rest of the ACPI is mostly sound and continue by ignoring the only
> dodgy table.
>
I didn't make any change there; I just preserved the original behaviour
of stopping all ACPI parsing when it returned -EINVAL (with a slightly
more helpful comment). My change was to make it continue to the I/O
APICs if it returned something else (ie, -ENODEV).
J
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-12 18:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 79+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-12 18:22 [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-12 18:22 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-12 18:28 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-12 18:28 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-12 18:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2009-06-12 18:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-12 20:11 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-06-15 2:01 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-12 20:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-12 20:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15 2:06 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-15 10:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15 10:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15 20:49 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-15 20:49 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-15 21:58 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15 21:58 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-16 19:38 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-16 19:38 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-17 5:10 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-17 5:10 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-17 12:02 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-17 12:02 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-17 17:32 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-17 17:32 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 2:58 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 2:58 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 19:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 19:34 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 20:28 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 21:09 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 21:09 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-19 1:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 1:38 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 3:10 ` [Xen-devel] " Jiang, Yunhong
2009-06-19 3:10 ` Jiang, Yunhong
2009-06-18 12:26 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15 10:51 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15 10:51 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 16:08 ` Len Brown
2009-06-18 19:14 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 19:14 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 19:27 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 19:48 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 19:48 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 20:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 22:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 22:33 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-19 2:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 2:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 19:58 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-19 19:58 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-19 23:44 ` [Xen-devel] " Nakajima, Jun
2009-06-19 23:44 ` Nakajima, Jun
2009-06-20 7:39 ` [Xen-devel] " Keir Fraser
2009-06-20 7:39 ` Keir Fraser
2009-06-20 8:21 ` [Xen-devel] " Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20 8:21 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20 8:57 ` [Xen-devel] " Tian, Kevin
2009-06-20 8:57 ` Tian, Kevin
2009-06-20 10:22 ` [Xen-devel] " Keir Fraser
2009-06-20 10:22 ` Keir Fraser
2009-06-20 8:18 ` [Xen-devel] " Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20 8:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 5:32 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-19 5:32 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-19 5:50 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 5:50 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 7:52 ` [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs justbecause " Jan Beulich
2009-06-19 7:52 ` Jan Beulich
2009-06-19 8:16 ` [Xen-devel] " Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 8:16 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20 3:58 ` [Xen-devel] " Yinghai Lu
2009-06-20 3:58 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-20 5:40 ` [Xen-devel] " Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20 5:40 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20 5:58 ` [Xen-devel] " Yinghai Lu
2009-06-20 5:58 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-18 22:51 ` [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because " Maciej W. Rozycki
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=4A329F8D.70906@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/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.