From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zhenzhong Duan Subject: Re: ask a question about ERST Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 10:30:51 +0800 Message-ID: <5080BB5B.4070004@oracle.com> References: <507FBE7F.3010403@oracle.com> <20121018120627.GA13485@localhost.localdomain> Reply-To: zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121018120627.GA13485@localhost.localdomain> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: Ethan Zhao , Feng Jin , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 2012-10-18 20:06, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 04:31:59PM +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: >> Hi maintainer, >> I found below patch reverted part of erst header size check. >> This lead to mismatch with kernel upstream code and erst disabled on >> some machine like X4170 M3/X3-2. >> According to the ACPI spec 4.0 and 5.0, the Serialization Header Length >> should be the length of Serialization Header. >> After revert below patch, xen succeed with erst table init. >> So could this patch be reverted now to match acpi spec and kernel upstream? > There was a discussion about this on xen-devel. Search for Jan and ERST > and I believe the idea was that an AMD machine needs to be checked > to figure out what to do. Well, I see. I'll wait for the final fix. thanks all