From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@sun.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [rfc] hw resource debugging checks
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:53:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080413105348.22e55ea5@laptopd505.fenrus.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87d4ouw0u9.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 11:39:10 +0200
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:
>
> This whole problem just shows that it was a mistake in the first place
> to try to redo the BIOS work in Linux. If BIOS doesn't supply MCFG
> Linux trying to create one (or in general having generalized resource
> allocation) is just a big mess and will cause endless problems. The
> standard resource code is just not up to the task and it needs very
> intimate knowledge of the hardware that the kernel shouldn't have.
>
> Again the real fix I think is to just drop all that code in git-x86
> again and finally fix LinuxBIOS to do its job properly and pass a
> proper MCFG (or just forget about using mmconfig with LinuxBIOS - it
> is not that Type1 suddently doesn't work anymore). Then this code
> wouldn't be needed at all
I totally agree with this. MCFG has been EXTREMELY fragile for the last years,
and I don't see that changing anytime soon.
The only thing that works for Linux so far is "if it even smells funny, don't use it".
Smelling funny is things like
1a) Bios table and e820 not matching up, or
1b) Bios table and hardware data not matching up
2) The content not matching content gotten via the traditional method
3) ... (bunch of other sanity checks)
I guess we really need to have
0) If it's not present in the BIOS do not touch
as rule as well.
--
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-13 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-10 19:59 x86 git tree broken Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-10 20:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-10 20:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-10 20:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-10 20:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-10 22:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-11 19:26 ` x86 git tree broken (bisected) Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-11 20:23 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-11 20:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-11 20:26 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-11 20:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-11 21:11 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-11 21:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-11 21:31 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 8:24 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 8:41 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 16:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-14 9:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-13 16:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-13 18:07 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 18:47 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-13 18:53 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 18:54 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 22:00 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 22:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-13 22:32 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 23:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-13 23:45 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-04-14 0:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-14 0:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-04-14 0:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-14 1:42 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-14 9:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-14 18:08 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-14 20:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-14 21:06 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-14 21:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-14 21:36 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 7:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-13 7:59 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 7:58 ` [rfc] hw resource debugging checks (was: Re: x86 git tree broken (bisected)) Ingo Molnar
2008-04-13 8:18 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 9:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-04-13 9:39 ` [rfc] hw resource debugging checks Andi Kleen
2008-04-13 17:53 ` Arjan van de Ven [this message]
2008-04-13 18:19 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 18:29 ` Andi Kleen
2008-04-13 19:29 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-14 3:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-04-14 5:01 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-14 14:12 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-04-14 18:11 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-04-13 15:48 ` [rfc] hw resource debugging checks (was: Re: x86 git tree broken (bisected)) Arjan van de Ven
2008-04-10 20:51 ` x86 git tree broken Ingo Molnar
2008-04-10 22:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-11 6:43 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080413105348.22e55ea5@laptopd505.fenrus.org \
--to=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yinghai.lu@sun.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®