On Tuesday 21 October 2008 16:00:14 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 04:01:55PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Moreover, as soon as the real fix is developed we can remove the DMI
> > list. Quite frankly, I don't see any downsides.
>
> The downside is that with the DMI list there's significantly less
> incentive to produce a "real" fix (assuming there is one). We've no idea
> how many other systems may be affected in one way or another.
With the boot param you at least get an idea how many other sytems are
affected.
If you run the linuxfirmwarekit, AFAIK there is a test: it extracts both FADTs
and compares the 32 and 64 bit addresses in case both are not 0 and throws a
warning it they differ.
If people see this and they have some mysterious problem, they should give
this: acpi_root_table=rsdt boot param a try (after applying the patches) and
report back.
Thanks,
Thomas
--
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
