On Monday, October 31, 2011 04:51:07 PM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:33 AM, Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Seems like these are BIOS bugs. Do we know for sure that Windows > consumes this information that seems to be wrong? Have you had a > conversation with the vendor about whether the BIOS is at fault here? Such closed specifications between a major OS and specific HW vendors should be forbidden by law and I expect in some countries you'll win if you contest this contract in a high enough court... APEI is based on the Windows WHEA specification which only specific vendors can retrieve from Windows if they sign an NDA contract. I could imagine there you find details about the GAS structure usage in WHEA/APEI tables the way Windows like it. After looking at quite a lot APEI tables and their bit width, byte access and mask values, I am pretty sure bit width is ignored on Windows. Or say, if these tables are used, access width is always correct while bit width is not. > If we make Linux ignore the bit_width, that might "fix" these boxes > with broken BIOSes, but at the cost of breaking a box that uses > bit_width correctly. None of the "broken bit width" boxes I looked at should break if access width is used. 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
