Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>]

On 06/12/09 11:28, Alan Cox wrote:
>> +		if (error == -EINVAL) {
>> +			/*
>> +			 * The ACPI tables themselves were malformed.
>> +			 * Dell Precision Workstation 410, 610 come here.
>> +			 */
>> +			printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX
>> +			       "Invalid BIOS MADT, disabling ACPI\n");
>> +			disable_acpi();
>> +		} else {
>>      
>
> This seems a very bad model. On todays systems turning off ACPI renders
> them basically useless. If the MADT is bogus its far better to pray that
> they rest of the ACPI is mostly sound and continue by ignoring the only
> dodgy table.
>    

I didn't make any change there; I just preserved the original behaviour 
of stopping all ACPI parsing when it returned -EINVAL (with a slightly 
more helpful comment).  My change was to make it continue to the I/O 
APICs if it returned something else (ie, -ENODEV).

     J