Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ACPICA: Revert "ACPICA: Add option to favor 32-bit FADT addresses." | Date | Tue, 13 May 2014 02:09:20 +0200 |
| |
On Monday, May 12, 2014 08:51:36 AM Zheng, Lv wrote: > Hi, Rafael > > I checked the bug. > > The dmesg of the kernel without the bisected commit: > [ 0.000000] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): Incorrect checksum in table [XSDT] - 0xA0, should be 0xC9 (20140214/tbprint-218) > [ 0.000000] ACPI Warning: 32/64 FACS address mismatch in FADT - two FACS tables! (20140214/tbfadt-395) > [ 0.000000] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X FACS address mismatch in FADT - 0xCF661F40/0x00000000CF667E40, using 32 (20140214/tbfadt-522) > > The dmesg of the kernel with the bisected commit: > [ 0.000000] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): Incorrect checksum in table [XSDT] - 0xA0, should be 0xC9 (20131218/tbprint-214) > [ 0.000000] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X FACS address mismatch in FADT: 0xCF661F40/0x00000000CF667E40, using 64-bit address (20131218/tbfadt-271) > > This is the purpose of the bisected commit. > According to the link below: > http://bugs.acpica.org/show_bug.cgi?id=885 > And Windows documentation: > http://download.microsoft.com/download/5/b/9/5b97017b-e28a-4bae-ba48-174cf47d23cd/CPA002_WH06.ppt > We believe 64-bit addresses should be used by default so that new features can be enabled according to the public knowledge of Windows Vista+ behavior. > For old Windows, it's hard for us to guess, we should wait for the reports and add quirks for them. > > Thus this commit is not wrong, it shouldn't be reverted.
It is wrong, because it breaks a system that worked without it.
It's *that* simple.
And either you have a fix for that (which is not a quirk, because there may be more machines like that), or we have to revert it.
> Though this platform is newer than vista, we still should offer a quirk mechanism > for it as a quick fix:
We didn't need a quirk for it before, though.
So really, I'm reverting it.
Thanks!
-- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
| |