On Fri, 18 Jul 2008, Thomas Renninger wrote: > On Friday 18 July 2008 09:16:25 am Andi Kleen wrote: > > Thomas Renninger wrote: > > > Introduce acpi_osi=windows_false boot parameter > > > Introduce CONFIG_ACPI_OSI_SPEC_CONFORM config option > > > > Why are you adding the CONFIG option? > > In what circumstances would one > > set it? If anything I think this should be a boot option only for now. > E.g. for OEMs that do not need to support all BIOSes in the world who > can just check for the config option and then know it behaves as written in > the spec and being able to support Linux and Windows through the same BIOS. > > But you are right, the compile option only makes sense if acpi_osi="Windows > 2006" can be used to simulate a specific Windows OS via boot param, which is > not the case. > > But I want the boot param. This one makes very much sense to test BIOSes > whether they stick to the ACPI spec and work fine on Linux without Windows > simulation. Is that ok? > > > Probably needs more discussion first. > I always wanted to write down the arguments again, but this takes a lot time. > Will you accept the boot param only? I don't see a case for this. This workaround is needed only if there is a Linux bug. I'd rather expose and fix that Linux bug than open the door to sweeping it under the rug and making Linux harder to maintain. -Len -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
