From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753723AbaCBXXM (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Mar 2014 18:23:12 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:35863 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752355AbaCBXXK (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Mar 2014 18:23:10 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,574,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="492540574" Message-ID: <5313BD5A.1040409@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 07:23:06 +0800 From: "Li, Aubrey" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Garrett CC: "H. Peter Anvin" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "alan@linux.intel.com" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Len.Brown@intel.com, Adam Williamson Subject: Re: [patch] x86: Introduce BOOT_EFI and BOOT_CF9 into the reboot sequence loop References: <53127C4B.1060505@zytor.com> <53128DA0.9060105@linux.intel.com> <53129256.6060704@zytor.com> <20140302022334.GA1131@srcf.ucam.org> <53130A46.1010801@linux.intel.com> <5313AD1B.6050403@linux.intel.com> <20140302222654.GA17838@srcf.ucam.org> <5313B47B.6020402@linux.intel.com> <20140302231154.GA20891@srcf.ucam.org> In-Reply-To: <20140302231154.GA20891@srcf.ucam.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2014/3/3 7:11, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> So, if you are still suggesting we add EFI only, please let me know your >> plan about adding dmidecode table and if it's acceptable to add new >> tables, I have three waiting: ASUS-T100, Dell Venue 8 Pro, and Dell >> Venue 11 Pro. > > I don't think it's acceptable to add DMI entries to the reboot table. I > think you should add the EFI call (since we expect that to work now), > and I have no objection to adding cf9 to the end of the list if we have > standard PCI io ports (Windows doesn't do it, but we can hardly make > things worse). > Windows doesn't do because there is no 32/64 mixed windows and EFI on the planet. Since the silicon is actually 64 bit, I failed to see a reason to refuse the user install 64bit linux on it. So we encountered a case windows didn't. So, you didn't mention BOOT_BIOS, if you don't want to add BOOT_BIOS, and you also don't like DMI entires, how do you want to deal with the machines requiring BOOT_BIOS to reboot their machine? Thanks, -Aubrey