Re: [PATCH] x86, CPU, AMD: Add workaround for family 16h, erratum793

From: Pavel Machek
Date: Fri Jan 17 2014 - 19:29:36 EST

On Fri 2014-01-17 14:51:52, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 01/17/2014 02:50 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:28:06PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> >> Would it make sense to printk() a warning?
> >
> > No because people come and start bitching about their dmesg containing
> > a warning and whether their hardware is b0rked without even reading the
> > actual words.

Have you checked your dmesg recently? Normal people don't read
it... it is just too much of it.

> Printing a warning is appropriate if we can't actually fix the problem
> in the OS. If we actually make the problem go away then we have just
> done our job and we can be done with it.

I disagree. Older kernel versions still may have problem, etc.

We normally do print warnings for problems we work around. We want
vendors to fix their hardware, too...

ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X FACS address mismatch in FADT -
0xBDB5FF40/0x00000000BDB64F40, using 32 (20131115/tbfadt-522)
[Firmware Bug]: ACPI: BIOS _OSI(Linux) query ignored

(cesky, pictures)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at