[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080307082441.GA12150@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 09:24:42 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>
Cc: Miguel Boton <mboton.lkml@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: mach_reboot_fixups()
* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com> wrote:
> Not exactly - when rebooting through EFI or BIOS, the old code didn't
> go through mach_reboot_fixups(), and I think that is the correct
> behavior (albeit, when the EFI path fell back to the triple fault
> mechanism, it should have honored the fixup logic, and I think it is
> more correct that the new code tries the keyboard method first).
> Perhaps the most reasonable way to go is to honor all reboot= settings
> without using the override code first:
> case BOOT_KBD:
> + mach_reboot_fixups(); /* for board specific fixups */
ok, agreed.
> (with the exception that reboot=keyboard will still have the effect of
> honoring the fixups, but I think this is better than further
> complicating the logic).
the fixups are really "emergency exceptions" - for (a very low number
of) broken boards that just cannot reboot via the default BOOT_KBD
method. In that sense it's a small detail how widely we apply the
exceptions - those boards probably wont be rebooted via reboot=bios
[people only use reboot options when they have trouble rebooting].
> In case you want to take this,
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>
i modified the patch and added your signoff - thanks,
Ingo
--
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