From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753090AbbCXUVV (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2015 16:21:21 -0400 Received: from ausxipps301.us.dell.com ([143.166.148.223]:11496 "EHLO ausxipps301.us.dell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752298AbbCXUVS (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2015 16:21:18 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: s=smtpout; d=dell.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=X-LoopCount0:X-IronPort-AV:Message-ID:Date:From: Organization:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=lrRKqJKly1xOwLusj+Nr/lMW5Sb8/1IcLqf9PEpeaCt0oYOpVyt3bp1q Df+LK+Kn6zh3r/0fXE4Km8UZ/KOYtulL4Ihv8fO3N4Ofq0WdaYCr+uBu5 YeuKlL2mbBzn+YUpvt9k3fjKtvVMmtOcagMbSyjJgNnOFzWIuZ2EQG02c Q=; X-LoopCount0: from 10.208.46.70 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,460,1422943200"; d="scan'208";a="636626572" Message-ID: <5511C73D.5020006@dell.com> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 15:21:17 -0500 From: Mario Limonciello Organization: Dell Inc. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Matt Fleming CC: Jason Ekstrand , LKML , Matthew Garrett , Bard Liao , Liam Girdwood , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "lenb@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Adjust the return value of _REV on x86 References: <1426150247-18309-1-git-send-email-matthew.garrett@nebula.com> <5510FB37.6030808@dell.com> <20150324152412.GA4706@codeblueprint.co.uk> <3241492.O6brgYIrX9@vostro.rjw.lan> In-Reply-To: <3241492.O6brgYIrX9@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/24/2015 03:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 03:24:12 PM Matt Fleming wrote: > While I agree in general, one comment. > > We haven't decided about the patch yet. We may decide to bump up the _REV > to 6 when ACPI 6 is out instead. I'd be happy with this too. > That said the whole using of _REV to special case Linux is broken by design > and should be stopped immediately. Especially when it is done by comparing > the return value of _REV to a specific number (like 5 or 3). > > Rafael > Yes, it's been made clear to me that this shouldn't be used in the future. I've shared that feedback to my BIOS architecture team.