From: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@linux-watchdog.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, Tom Abraham <tabraham@suse.com>
Subject: Re: wdat_wdt: access width inconsistency
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:03:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200211180331.11dbe525@endymion> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200211163753.GK2667@lahna.fi.intel.com>
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:37:53 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 05:25:33PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:59:44 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > If the default timeout is short then that might happen but I think WDAT
> > > spec had some "reasonable" lower limit.
> >
> > Could you please point me to the WDAT specification? Somehow my web
> > search failed to spot it.
>
> You can find it here:
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/hardware/gg463320.aspx
>
> Most of the ACPI related documents not part of the spec itself are
> listed in the following page:
>
> https://uefi.org/acpi
Great, thanks for the info.
As I read the specification, it is mandatory to have a timeout >= 5
minutes *if* the watchdog is enabled at boot time. Otherwise the 5
minutes is only a recommendation. I wouldn't be surprised if some
hardware vendors do not initialize the timeout value and assume the OS
will do it for them. Odds are that Windows does that.
Thanks again,
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-11 17:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-10 10:16 wdat_wdt: access width inconsistency Jean Delvare
2020-02-10 11:23 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-11 13:11 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-11 13:59 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-11 16:25 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-11 16:37 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-11 17:03 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2020-02-12 11:05 ` [PATCH 1/3] ACPICA: Introduce ACPI_ACCESS_BIT_WIDTH() macro Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:05 ` [PATCH 2/3] ACPI / watchdog: Fix gas->access_width usage Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:56 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-12 12:10 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:05 ` [PATCH 3/3] ACPI / watchdog: Set default timeout in probe Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 12:07 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-12 12:13 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:52 ` [PATCH 1/3] ACPICA: Introduce ACPI_ACCESS_BIT_WIDTH() macro Jean Delvare
2020-02-12 12:08 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-11 16:45 ` wdat_wdt: access width inconsistency Guenter Roeck
2020-02-12 10:30 ` Jean Delvare
2020-02-12 10:47 ` Mika Westerberg
2020-02-12 11:05 ` Jean Delvare
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200211180331.11dbe525@endymion \
--to=jdelvare@suse.de \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=tabraham@suse.com \
--cc=wim@linux-watchdog.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox