[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080527165043.6522f061.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 16:50:43 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Tony Luck" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ACPI: add DMI info to enable OSI(Linux) on
PRIMEQUEST
On Tue, 27 May 2008 16:41:59 -0700
"Tony Luck" <tony.luck@...el.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure that sharing drivers/acpi/blacklist.c between different
> architectures is wise idea. There are entries in there that make
> blanket decisions for all machines made by an OEM.
>
> It seems quite possible that an OEM that makes boxes using
> different processor architectures might make different mistakes
> in the respective BIOS teams.
>
So... what's the fix? We don't appear to have a blacklisting table
under arch/ia64. Should `#ifdef CONFIG_IA64' be added to
drivers/acpi/blacklist.c entries?
--
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