From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] rtc-efi: register rtc-efi device when EFI enabled Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 16:42:55 -0800 Message-ID: <50DE3C8F.4000405@zytor.com> References: <1356712001-12198-1-git-send-email-jlee@suse.com> <3fa7337e-6bbc-4462-9704-2d8ac20a9cf2@email.android.com> <50DE03D8.9030902@zytor.com> <35da3df5-ecac-4b57-83a2-828326e5bfc3@email.android.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew Garrett Cc: "Lee, Chun-Yi" , "matt.fleming@intel.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-efi@vger.kernel.org" , "Lee, Chun-Yi" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Jan Beulich , Len Brown , Arjan van de Ven List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org On 12/28/2012 03:39 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Fri, 2012-12-28 at 15:32 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> No, that is explicitly the ordering that is excludable. > > Windows uses the UEFI time functions. The fact that they fail for us on > a bunch of systems is just another symptom of our general failure to > accurately mimic Windows when making runtime calls, and we should just > make sure that that gets fixed rather than layering more workarounds on > top. It's an embarrassment that we're still unable to deal with > platforms that work fine with another OS. > Are they using them in preference to ACPI? This seems a bit odd, since one can presume that the ACPI functions were added at Microsoft's request... -hpa