[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c0d6535f-324b-557a-3d0e-ccec070459a7@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 13:24:11 -0500
From: Sinan Kaya <okaya@...nel.org>
To: Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
Cc: Tyler Baicar <baicar.tyler@...il.com>, mr.nuke.me@...il.com,
austin_bolen@...l.com, alex_gagniuc@...lteam.com,
Shyam_Iyer@...l.com, lukas@...ner.de, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
rjw@...ysocki.net, lenb@...nel.org, ruscur@...sell.cc,
sbobroff@...ux.ibm.com, oohall@...il.com,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] PCI/AER: Consistently use _OSC to determine who owns
AER
On 11/19/2018 1:10 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
>> We can't really turn off firmware first in the kernel without asking help
>> from the firmware.
> The _OSC method this patch utilizes is the ACPI spec defined way for
> the kernel to wrest control from firmware. BIOS specific menu settings
> shouldn't be our only recourse when we have a spec authority defining
> generic OS interfaces to accomplish the same thing.
>
> Unless there is a disagreement on the _OSC interpreation, we'd have to
> accept that platforms breaking from this patch are non-compliant.
>
It depends on which spec you look :)
UEFI HEST table specification also claims that it should be the ultimate
table for when PCI firmware-first should be disabled/enabled.
I think somebody needs to fix these. I saw an email from Harb Abdulhamid
sent to aswg this morning.
That's why I suggested circulating this idea in UEFI forums first.
Let's see what everybody thinks. We can go from there.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists