[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140228045637.GA28257@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 04:56:37 +0000
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "alan@...ux.intel.com" <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>, Len.Brown@...el.com,
Adam Williamson <awilliam@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86: Introduce BOOT_EFI and BOOT_CF9 into the reboot
sequence loop
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 12:11:57PM +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> This patch is to introduce BOOT_EFI and BOOT_CF9 in the reboot sequence
> loop, to fix the reboot problem on the known Intel Bay Trail-T based
> platform, for example, ASUS-T100 and Dell Venue 8/11 Pro. These
> platforms don't support ACPI reboot, we expect to call EFI runtime
> service to handle this case, and CF9 is an alternate after EFI.
EFI reboot is still somewhat unreliable - it may be safe after the
recent patches to provide a 1:1 mapping. CF9 is, as far as I know, not
part of any spec, so it seems like a bad idea to put it in the default
list.
What do the ACPI reboot vectors look like on these systems?
> - * 3) If still alive, write to the ACPI reboot register again
> - * 4) If still alive, write to the keyboard controller again
> + * 3) If still alive, call EFI runtime service
> + * 4) If still alive, write to the PCI IO port 0xCF9
This is definitely incorrect. The ACPI write *must* occur twice in order
to be effective on various systems. EFI shouldn't be attempted until
after the second ACPI write.
--
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