[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <479E455F.7010706@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:13:03 -0500
From: Peter Jones <pjones@...hat.com>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek <konrad@...nok.org>
CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Doug Maxey <dwm@...yolf.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, greg@...ah.com, darnok@....org,
konradr@...hat.com, konradr@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
randy.dunlap@...cle.com, lenb@...nel.org, mike.anderson@...ibm.com,
dwm@...tin.ibm.com, arjan@...radead.org, michaelc@...wisc.edu,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add iSCSI iBFT support (v0.4.5)
Konrad Rzeszutek wrote:
>> iBFT is not platform-independent; it only makes sense on platforms with
>> ACPI (and even then, just barely; ACPI is a poor fit for it and it was
>> probably "integrated" with ACPI for political reasons.)
>
> The spec just mentions that iBFT table has to be "compatible with an ACPI
> table format" and nothing else.
Well, that's not quite accurate. It also mentions that OEM IDs for
vendors come from the ACPI SIG, and they also reserved the "IBFT"
signature with the ACPI SIG (it's in ACPI 3.0). It's also pretty clear
that the "Locating the iBFT" section in the spec used to be a list with
more than one entry and has been edited down to one.
That being said, I don't think there's any reason to expect the table to
show up on anything but i386 and x86_64, and maybe ia64.
--
Peter
--
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