Re: [RT] [RFC] simple SMI detector

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Sat, 24 Jan 2009, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 01:12:45PM +1100, Sven-Thorsten Dietrich wrote:
> I will also note that for some applications (i.e., military hardware
> running under battle conditions), where it might be that running the
> hardware beyond its thermal limits might actually be *desirable*.
> After all, an extra 15 minutes of running beyond thermal limits that
> eventually causes the CPU to get flakey might be worth it if the
> alternative is the ship getting sunk because the BIOS decided that
> shutting down the CPU to save it from thermal damage was more
> important than say, running the anti-aircraft guns....

In that case the system designer knows exactly what he is doing and he
is aware of the consequences.

My concern about the SMI disable module is that it can damage Joe
users hardware. I have at least two reports where the CPU got fried
and some others where people got confused because chips started
behaving weird and it took quite a time to figure out that they used
the SMI disabler. A big fat warning about this code is definitely
necessary.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/