[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061118072259.GC14673@flower.upol.cz>
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2006 07:22:59 +0000
From: Oleg Verych <olecom@...wer.upol.cz>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
vgoyal@...ibm.com, akpm@...l.org, rjw@...k.pl,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, Reloc Kernel List <fastboot@...ts.osdl.org>,
pavel@...e.cz, magnus.damm@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/20] x86_64: Move CPU verification code to common file
On Fri, Nov 17, 2006 at 10:59:32PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Oleg Verych wrote:
> >
> >It will burn CPU, until power cycle will be done (my AMD64 laptop and
> >Intel's amd64 destop PC require that). In case of reboot timeout (or
> >just reboot with jump to BIOS), i will just choose another image to boot
> >or will press F8 to have another boot device.
> >
>
> That's a fairly stupid argument, since it assumes operator intervention,
> at which point you have access to the machine anyway.
I would never call *power cycle* stupid, just because from physics
point of veiw.
Example. I have my flower.upol.cz many kilometers far away from me.
I used to boot it from that flash (new hardware, sata problems, etc).
When something goes wrong with rc kernel or power source, bum.
And i had to move my ass there, just to press reset. Because.
While i have "power on, on AC failures" in BIOS, *sometimes* flash
will not boot (i don't know why, maybe it's GRUB+flash-read,
or BIOS usb hdd implementation specific).
DTR laptop ~33% doesn't boot that flash. And laptop has no reset button.
Operator is present, so your consern is right here.
> A stronger argument is, again, that some bootloaders can do unattended
> fallback.
____
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists