From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI, APEI, Add APEI _OSC support
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 02:42:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110617014213.GA30826@srcf.ucam.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4DFAB081.6050800@intel.com>
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 09:40:17AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> On 06/17/2011 09:34 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > If the kernel has been configured with support for the feature then I
> > think we ought to be able to assume that the kernel will support it at
> > runtime.
>
> There may be error during driver initialization. That is what I am
> concerned.
That's true of any _OSC functionality.
> >> So I think we can do that in 2 steps. At first, we just enable WHEA
> >> UUID, because that is easier to do. Then we find a way to implement
> >> "APEI bit" in generic _OSC call. Do you think that is a good idea?
> >
> > I'm fine with that, providing that GHES isn't disabled purely because
> > the WHEA UUID call wasn't successful.
>
> Because we have not added the code to make generic _OSC call with "APEI
> bit" now, so if WHEA UUID call failed, we have no firmware first mode
> enabled. So I think it is safe to disable GHES if WHEA UUID call
> failed. But in another hand, keeping GHES has no harm too. So I am OK
> to keep GHES if WHEA UUID call failed.
I see your point. But this does need to be fixed in the long run.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-17 1:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-25 6:05 [PATCH] ACPI, APEI, Add APEI _OSC support Huang Ying
2011-06-13 14:50 ` Don Zickus
2011-06-14 6:33 ` Chen Gong
2011-06-14 12:11 ` Don Zickus
2011-06-14 14:52 ` Matthew Garrett
2011-06-15 3:53 ` Huang Ying
2011-06-15 12:17 ` Matthew Garrett
2011-06-16 0:40 ` Huang Ying
2011-06-16 1:38 ` Matthew Garrett
2011-06-16 1:55 ` Huang Ying
2011-06-16 1:57 ` Matthew Garrett
2011-06-17 0:57 ` Huang Ying
2011-06-17 1:34 ` Matthew Garrett
2011-06-17 1:40 ` Huang Ying
2011-06-17 1:42 ` Matthew Garrett [this message]
2011-06-17 1:53 ` Huang Ying
2011-06-16 9:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20110617014213.GA30826@srcf.ucam.org \
--to=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).