"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Ingo Molnar wrote: >> >> well then we could insert CF9 to before the triple fault, and solve >> some of the problems as well, without unnecessary risks. >> >> This is a separate patch from ACPI reboot itself, naturally. >> > > This is a pretty good point. There is extremely low risk of being > something at port CF9 that is something other than the reset register. > It may not be there, but if it isn't, the worst thing that happened is > we confused a device right before reset. > > Even better if we condition the port CF9 write on existence a PCI bus > (or even more specifically PCI Configuration Method #1 or #2). Port CF9 > is extremely unlikely to exist on a machine without a PCI bus, and > extremely unlikely to conflict with anything else on a machine with a > PCI bus. Yes. What we are guarding against in practice is a write that causes the system to hang. Anything else and we will make it to the next reset method. Eric -- 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
