Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI / x86: Work around broken XSDT on Advantech DAC-BJ01 board

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi Mark,

On 3/2/22 21:20, Mark Cilissen wrote:
>> On 2 Mar 4 Reiwa, at 10:02, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
> 
> Hi Hans,
> 
>>
>>> […]
>>
>> Heh, I should have noticed this new version before replying. I see that
>> you've dropped the BIOS-date match. But that actually is often more useful
>> then the BIOS_VERSION, sometimes vendors don't bump the version when
>> doing a new BIOS build.
>>
>> If you only want to match the exact BIOS you tested against I would
>> drop the BIOS_VENDOR check instead.
> 
> I am admittedly bit wary of dropping the BIOS_VENDOR check. As the cause of
> this issue seems to be specifically a BIOS compilation error, it feels 
> incomplete to leave this match out.
> 
> Since “CRB” in the DMI product name indicates the board design is derivative
> of a generic Intel reference design (“Customer Reference Board”),
> maybe it’s better to drop the SYS_VENDOR match instead?
> It seems to bear little relation to the actual vendor (Advantech)
> encountered in my testing hardware, anyway.
> 
> Let me know; if you still feel it’s better to drop the BIOS_VENDOR match,
> I will do that instead.

I think that there are a lot more boards that will have
DMI_BIOS_VENDOR == "Phoenix Technologies LTD"
then that there are boards that will have
DMI_PRODUCT_NAME == "Bearlake CRB Board"

So if you want to make the DMI match as specific as possible then
IMHO dropping the bios-vendor match is best.

Regards,

Hans