From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] x86, ACPI: default to reboot via ACPI (again) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 13:00:29 +0000 Message-ID: <20081110130029.GC30894@srcf.ucam.org> References: <007e7d616a5d1c2e16ad627d03f8b97799445e71.1226032943.git.len.brown@intel.com> <200811080930.21462.arvidjaar@mail.ru> <200811081050.25477.arvidjaar@mail.ru> <20081108115956.GE8354@elte.hu> <4916B38B.7050905@redhat.com> <4916B4DB.90602@zytor.com> <20081110083938.GD22392@elte.hu> <20081110115732.GA30181@srcf.ucam.org> <20081110125630.GC28643@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:45339 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754824AbYKJNAs (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Nov 2008 08:00:48 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081110125630.GC28643@elte.hu> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , "Eric W. Biederman" , Avi Kivity , Andrey Borzenkov , Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown , Thomas Gleixner , Eduardo Habkost , Andrew Morton On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 01:56:30PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Matthew Garrett wrote: > > or something. Microsoft appear to have moved away from using date > > cutoffs for anything other than whether or not to enable ACPI in the > > first place, and we ought to attempt compatibility with them. > > okay, that's fine to me too. My main point is that we need something > nuanced this time around (be it a string check or a cutoff) - not the > "enable again" patch that i saw in the ACPI tree and which i had to > NAK. All we need now is confirmation as to which versions of Windows use this behaviour. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org