public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
To: Christian Hofstaedtler <ch@zeha.at>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com,
	arjan@infradead.org, bruce.w.allan@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Default to ACPI reboots on newish X86 hardware
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 00:21:12 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1001200007560.4265@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1262894593-25563-1-git-send-email-ch@zeha.at>

On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Christian Hofstaedtler wrote:

Thanks for writing this patch Christian,
it is something that has been unsettled for
a long time and it will be great to close the issue.

> Newer hardware is assumed to no longer reboot succesfully using the
> keyboard controller, but needs to use ACPI instead.
> To not cause problems with older hardware, only hardware with a BIOS
> date 2006 or newer is considered for this choice. Broken BIOSes
> reporting a BIOS date of 0 are not specially considered, and therefore
> get the KBD reboot behaviour.
> 
> Also unifiy reboot_type selection code.

Please split the patch in two patches:

1. cleanup w/o policy change
2. policy change w/o cleanup

better if the policy change is #2, so if we need to revert it
we don't have to revert the cleanup too.

> Signed-off-by: Christian Hofstaedtler <ch@zeha.at>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/emergency-restart.h |    1 +
>  arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c                 |   65 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)


> +/* See if the Hardware is new enough to support ACPI reboots. */
> +static int __init reboot_acpi_likey_supported(void)
> +{
> +        int year;
> +
> +	/* Doesn't exist? Likely an old system */
> +	if (!dmi_get_date(DMI_BIOS_DATE, &year, NULL, NULL)) {
> +		return 0;
> +	}

I think it may be better to simply return 1 in this case.

While we have seen dmi_get_date() fail in practice on "modern" machines,
if CONFIG_ACPI_BLACKLIST_YEAR is set, we will already punish users by
disabling ACPI and making them invoke acpi=force.

So the effect of this check is to disable ACPI-reset
on systems where the user has likely already invoked acpi=force --
which seems somewhat counter-intuitive.

> +        /* 2006 was decided as the cut-off year. */
> +	if (year < 2006) {
> +		return 0;
> +	}

I'd rather see 2003.
If we run into trouble, it is a 1-liner to move it forward.
But I think we'll probably do fine with anything newer than 2001.

thanks,
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technolgy Center


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-01-20  5:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20100104162114.GA30113@percival.namespace.at>
2010-01-04 17:15 ` [PATCH] Add DMI quirk for Intel DP55KG mainboard Len Brown
2010-01-04 17:30   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-04 22:03     ` Len Brown
2010-01-05  2:15       ` Robert Hancock
2010-01-05  3:37         ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-05 12:30           ` [PATCH] Default to ACPI reboots on newish X86 hardware Christian Hofstaedtler
2010-01-05 17:04             ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-05 18:26               ` Christian Hofstaedtler
2010-01-06  6:06                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-06 19:38                 ` Len Brown
2010-01-07 20:03                   ` Christian Hofstaedtler
2010-01-07 20:05                     ` Christian Hofstaedtler
2010-01-07 23:05                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-20  5:21                     ` Len Brown [this message]
2010-01-21 17:18                       ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: Unify reboot_type selection Christian Hofstaedtler
2010-01-21 17:18                         ` [PATCH 2/2] Default to ACPI reboots on newish X86 hardware Christian Hofstaedtler
2010-01-23 19:57                           ` Len Brown
2010-01-21 18:29                         ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: Unify reboot_type selection H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-21 17:24                       ` [PATCH] Default to ACPI reboots on newish X86 hardware Christian Hofstaedtler
2010-01-05  1:45     ` [PATCH] Add DMI quirk for Intel DP55KG mainboard Arjan van de Ven
2010-01-06 14:36       ` Matthew Garrett
2010-01-06 19:26         ` Len Brown
2010-01-06 19:36           ` Matthew Garrett
2010-01-06 20:22             ` Len Brown
2010-01-06 20:29               ` Matthew Garrett
2010-01-06 21:26               ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-20  5:06                 ` Len Brown
2010-01-07  1:15               ` Robert Hancock
2010-01-06  7:41   ` Pavel Machek
2010-01-06 14:51     ` Alan Cox

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.2.00.1001200007560.4265@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=bruce.w.allan@intel.com \
    --cc=ch@zeha.at \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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