From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Robert Hancock <hancockr@shaw.ca>,
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>,
Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, fabio.comolli@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Re: Linux 2.6.28-rc1] ACPI Warning (nspredef-0852)[...]
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 00:03:19 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811292351580.3239@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200810252004.01274.rjw@sisk.pl>
> The underlying issue is we've never reported such BIOS bugs before and now we
> do that unconditionally. IMnshO, this should only be done if ACPI debugging is
> enabled.
>
> While I can see a value in doing that always, IMO such a change should only be
> made after a big announcement.
I agree that we were aggressive in shipping this checking in 2.6.28-rc.
The checking has no functional effect, except to issue a console warning,
so I figured it had limited down-side.
It actually paid off almost immediately by pointing out why
a Linux bug was provoked on jejb's test box.
I had figured on making it CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG for the
final release, but at this point we've seen only the
_BIF and _WAK warnings -- and they're both dealt with
via the patches queued for Linus.
So at this point, I'm inclined to keep this checking enabled in
2.6.28-final, independent of CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG.
-Len
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-30 5:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <fa.1HaqObZirROiyqr922A7hRDVc54@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.SvX6X2rOJRj5l1wwqyz6iNq7qHU@ifi.uio.no>
[not found] ` <fa.Rzh43vSl9NX1QQ2nOYQSgEJcZAw@ifi.uio.no>
2008-10-25 17:10 ` [Re: Linux 2.6.28-rc1] ACPI Warning (nspredef-0852)[...] Robert Hancock
2008-10-25 18:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-10-25 18:51 ` Maciej Rutecki
2008-10-27 20:19 ` Maciej Rutecki
2008-10-28 7:18 ` Zhao Yakui
2008-10-28 9:44 ` Zhao Yakui
2008-10-28 19:45 ` Maciej Rutecki
2008-11-03 12:06 ` Maciej Rutecki
2008-11-03 12:26 ` Alexey Starikovskiy
2008-11-03 14:17 ` Alan Jenkins
2008-11-03 16:37 ` Maciej Rutecki
2008-11-03 19:01 ` Maciej Rutecki
2008-11-03 19:41 ` Maciej Rutecki
2008-11-30 5:03 ` Len Brown [this message]
2008-10-25 7:21 [Re: " Maciej Rutecki
2008-10-25 10:59 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-10-25 11:43 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.0811292351580.3239@localhost.localdomain \
--to=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=fabio.comolli@gmail.com \
--cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.rutecki@gmail.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/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