[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091023170428.GA25484@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 19:04:28 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>,
Erwan Velu <erwanaliasr1@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmi_check_system can generate Warnings when no DMI
table is present
* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> On 10/23/09 08:30, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> Ingo mentioned that the returning mechanism your adding was left out
> >> intentionally to catch this error, so I don't think your original
> >> patch could be included ..
> >>
> > Yes. That mechanism found a real bug here.
> >
> > Calling the DMI code too early (when the strings are still empty)
> > can cause silent failures: we wont crash but we might miss to act on
> > DMI quirks.
>
> Yes. There's nothing preventing the DMI subsystem from being
> initialized under Xen; in fact we rely on it in a dom0 kernel (which
> does have access to the DMI tables). I don't know what the underlying
> bug in the original report is, but there's more to it than failing to
> init DMI.
yeah. It's probably some init ordering problem - some version of Xen
calling into the DMI code too early. It probably doesnt even matter in
practice as we rarely rely on DMI details in Xen guests, right?
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