Re: [discuss] Re: Please pull x86-64 bug fixes

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>]

On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 19:06 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Duran, Leo wrote:
> > OK, lets' take K8 processor performance states (p-states) as an example:
> > BIOS, which should know 'best' about a given platform, needs to
> > communicate to the OS what 'voltage' (VID code) is correct for given
> > 'frequency' (FID),
> > and it can do that via ACPI processor tables (_PSS). Otherwise, OS code
> > is left with having to manage a HUGE amount 'specifics' (processor
> > models), and endless driver revisions to account for new parts.
> > 
> > So, one can argue that there's merit on having ACPI, it's just a shame
> > when BIOS doesn't get it right! (thus the justification for lack of
> > 'trust'... the same can probably be said about other BIOS issues, not
> > just ACPI)
> 
> That's pretty much it in a nutshell...  Since most BIOS are largely 
> tested and qualified only on That Other OS, Linux often gets the short 
> end of the stick. 

fwiw we're trying to get this changed; Intel released the Linux-ready
firmware developer kit recently which is designed to make it real easy
for bios people to test their bios with linux....

see http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.org

-- 
if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com