From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [RESEND] [PATCH 2/3] Introduce acpi_root_table=rsdt boot param and dmi list to force rsdt Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:46:04 +0100 Message-ID: <20081021124604.GA27273@srcf.ucam.org> References: <200810192350.57993.trenn@suse.de> <20081020175124.GH18277@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20081020175814.GA13067@srcf.ucam.org> <200810211157.46134.trenn@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:35193 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755490AbYJUMqR (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 08:46:17 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200810211157.46134.trenn@suse.de> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Renninger Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , Len Brown , linux-acpi , Zhao Yakui , me@markdoughty.co.uk, linux-thinkpad , "devel@acpica.org" On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:57:44AM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: > Yes we have: > - XP uses 32 bit addresses > - Vista uses the newer FADT revision and there the 64 bit addresses. > > This information is from BIOS engineers who should know Windows behaviour much > better than we ever could. If Vista is absolutely known to *always* use the 64-bit addresses under every single circumstance where they're present, then yes, I agree that this is probably the least bad situation. This is trivial to test - install Vista on an R40e and see if it hangs on boot. If it does, I withdraw my objection. If not, then we're not fixing it properly. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org