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 15:49:30 +0100 Message-ID: <20081021144930.GA30301@srcf.ucam.org> References: <200810192350.57993.trenn@suse.de> <200810211625.47889.rjw@sisk.pl> <20081021142956.GA29837@srcf.ucam.org> <200810211645.45945.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]:41584 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751605AbYJUOtg (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:49:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200810211645.45945.trenn@suse.de> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Renninger Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , 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 04:45:44PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: > On Tuesday 21 October 2008 16:29:56 Matthew Garrett wrote: > > How? We *know* we're deviating from the behaviour of Windows here. > Matthew, there is no solution to stick to the Windows behaviour. > Even if hundreds of machines are affected, you have still not yet come up with > a generic solution, but try to block the fix. You're the one asserting that Windows behaves in a certain way. I'm asking you to justify that assertion. The information from that test allows us to determine whether a static table is the best we can do or not. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org