From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [git pull request] ACPI patches for 2.6.34-rc6 Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 02:03:30 +0200 Message-ID: <201005080203.30634.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <201005080117.23760.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:57304 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752310Ab0EHACh (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 May 2010 20:02:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Len Brown , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton On Saturday 08 May 2010, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sat, 8 May 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: ... > > Let me explain what I think we should do with actual code: > > acpi_enable(); > if (test_if_that_f_cking_bit_still_isnt_set) > set_it_by_hand(); > > wouldn't that work on your box? Yes, it would. > The acpi_enable() seems to work for you, so it wouldn't actually ever set it > by hand. > > But the problem is that on a number of boxes, acpi_enable() apparently > doesn't do what it should do. Because the stupid BIOS "knows" it is > already in ACPI mode, but it forgot to actually set the bit! To calrify, I think the approach in the Matthew's patch is correct, but since I have some bad experience with that particular thing, I prefer to make that change in 2.6.35 and then move on to drop the flag entirely. Rafael