Re: [Linaro-acpi] [PATCH v5 0/5] Provide better MADT subtable sanity checks

[Sudeep Holla]

On 12/10/15 20:25, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, October 12, 2015 10:44:52 AM Sudeep Holla wrote:

[...]

> > Instead of just removing the check completely on x86, IMO restrict
> > it to some newer/later version of ACPI so you can still force
> > vendors to fix their ACPI tables at-least in future.
>
> No, we can't force vendors to fix their ACPI tables.  This is
> completely unrealistic.

No, I was referring to the future platforms *only*

> We simly need to deal with the bugs in the ACPI tables in the
> kernel.

Yes sadly true for existing systems, but if we now place a check for
ACPIv6.0 and above, we might avoid seeing such broken tables sometime in
future once the kernel with this check in place is used for validation.

> > It would be good to get such sanity check in the tools used to
> > build those tables, but yes since such static tables can be built
> > in many ways, its difficult to deal it in all those tools.
>
> As I said to Al, we need those checks in firmware test suites.
> Having them in the kernel is OK too, but they should cause warnings
> to be printed to the kernel log instead of causing the kernel to
> panic.

Agreed

--
Regards,
Sudeep
--
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/