* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: > > > > I think the sequence should be acpi -> kbd -> triple fault. Given that > > Windows uses ACPI, the number of machines that support it is much larger > > (and growing daily) than the number of machines that do not. > > > > Like with many other things ACPI, there probably should be an ACPI > date cutoff for using it by default. There is also port CF9 reboot > (often incorrectly described as "PCI reboot", but it has nothing to > do with the PCI standard.) so, the sequence should be: [ acpi if date > 2007 ] -> kbd -> triple fault Where in this sequence should we insert port-CF9 reboot? We have no discovery of it, etc. The KGDB reboot will do _something_ on most boxes, so inserting it like this: [ acpi if date > 2007 ] -> kbd -> port-CF9 -> triple fault ... will likely have no practical impact as we rarely get to the triple fault method to begin with. So the reboot chain we'd like to have is: [ acpi if date > 2007 ] -> safe-port-CF9 -> kbd -> triple fault ... where safe-port-CF9 is something that can be done safely on all x86 boxes. Anyway, safe-port-CF9 aside, the ACPI sequence should definitely be cutoff based, so the plain re-introduction of the patch that changes the default is not acceptable. Ingo -- 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
