[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110617013442.GA30708@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 02:34:42 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI, APEI, Add APEI _OSC support
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 08:57:09AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> On 06/16/2011 09:57 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Yeah, this is going to be a problem. We have the HEST available at this
> > point so we ought to be able to parse it, though. I'll take a look
> > tomorrow.
>
> We can check the HEST table before _OSC evaluating. But it is much
> harder to check software part, because we have implemented GHES support
> (Generic Hardware Error Source, the handler of firmware first mode
> hardware error notification) as device driver and module.
If the kernel has been configured with support for the feature then I
think we ought to be able to assume that the kernel will support it at
runtime.
> So I think we can do that in 2 steps. At first, we just enable WHEA
> UUID, because that is easier to do. Then we find a way to implement
> "APEI bit" in generic _OSC call. Do you think that is a good idea?
I'm fine with that, providing that GHES isn't disabled purely because
the WHEA UUID call wasn't successful.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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