Linux CXL
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: PJ Waskiewicz <ppwaskie@kernel.org>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] cxl/acpi.c: Add buggy BIOS hint for CXL ACPI lookup failure
Date: Thu, 02 May 2024 10:34:33 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6af0488a5d845028978f57e63f3706f8899465cf.camel@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6632640bef65a_10c21294e3@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch>

On Wed, 2024-05-01 at 08:47 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> PJ Waskiewicz wrote:
> > Buggy BIOS, that above value resolves to CX02.  In fact, it
> > *should* be
> > 49.  This is very much a bug in the ACPI arena.
> 
> Ok, so back to this patch in question, my concern with upgrading:
> 
>     dev_err(dev, "unable to retrieve _UID\n");
> 
> ...to say "potentially buggy BIOS", is that same charge could be
> levied
> against all of the dev_warn() and dev_err() instances in
> drivers/cxl/acpi.c. So, it's not clear to me that cxl_acpi driver
> failures need to be more explicit.
> 
> Otherwise, pretty much any ACPI hiccup message in the kernel would be
> candidate for claiming "BIOS is busted".

I really do like your patch you proposed a few weeks back.  I'm happy
to pull that and test it if you'd like to move forward on that instead.

Personally, I think the amount of discussion generated around this
simple "the BIOS is broken" should warrant some level of change to help
others not in-the-know to understand why their shiny new CXL devices
fell over on init.  Whatever that change looks like though, I'm not
married to any particular approach.

-PJ

  reply	other threads:[~2024-05-02 17:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-07 21:05 [PATCH 1/1] cxl/acpi.c: Add buggy BIOS hint for CXL ACPI lookup failure ppwaskie
2024-04-07 21:28 ` Lukas Wunner
2024-04-08  2:03   ` PJ Waskiewicz
2024-04-08  8:34     ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-04-08 19:29       ` PJ Waskiewicz
2024-04-08 20:45         ` Dan Williams
2024-04-08 21:32           ` PJ Waskiewicz
2024-04-09  4:22             ` PJ Waskiewicz
2024-04-08 16:54 ` Dan Williams
2024-04-08 19:25   ` PJ Waskiewicz
2024-04-09 13:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-04-29  5:57   ` PJ Waskiewicz
2024-04-29 15:31     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-04-29 18:35       ` Dan Williams
2024-05-01 15:28         ` PJ Waskiewicz
2024-05-01 15:47           ` Dan Williams
2024-05-02 17:34             ` PJ Waskiewicz [this message]
2024-05-02 18:29               ` Dan Williams
2024-05-01 17:54           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-05-02 17:30             ` PJ Waskiewicz

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=6af0488a5d845028978f57e63f3706f8899465cf.camel@kernel.org \
    --to=ppwaskie@kernel.org \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.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