From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: "Américo Wang" <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
"Greg KH" <greg@kroah.com>, "Seiji Aguchi" <seiji.aguchi@hds.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"mikew@google.com" <mikew@google.com>,
"a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"tj@kernel.org" <tj@kernel.org>,
"fweisbec@gmail.com" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
"dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net"
<dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"Satoru Moriya" <satoru.moriya@hds.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] pstore: EFI Support
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 02:46:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110512014656.GA12513@srcf.ucam.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DCA9CE2.1080307@zytor.com>
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 07:27:46AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 05/11/2011 06:09 AM, Américo Wang wrote:
> >I agree. It seems that we should enable this by default when APEI and
> >EFI are both enabled, this could be done by Kconfig.
> >
>
> No, it can't. That would be a compile-time option, but the
> selection needs to be at runtime.
>
> However, it is still unclear that this is actually a win at all...
It's a win in that not all EFI platforms are ACPI. I don't think we're
yet in a position to say which is preferable when we have both.
(Are we really arguing over which broken Intel firmware spec is less
broken than the other?)
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-12 1:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-10 15:00 [RFC][PATCH] pstore: EFI Support Seiji Aguchi
2011-05-10 16:11 ` Greg KH
2011-05-10 16:57 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-05-10 19:18 ` Seiji Aguchi
2011-05-10 20:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-05-11 13:09 ` Américo Wang
2011-05-11 14:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-05-12 1:46 ` Matthew Garrett [this message]
2011-05-10 20:52 ` Luck, Tony
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=20110512014656.GA12513@srcf.ucam.org \
--to=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikew@google.com \
--cc=satoru.moriya@hds.com \
--cc=seiji.aguchi@hds.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/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