[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>]

On 06/12/09 11:28, Alan Cox wrote:
> > +               if (error == -EINVAL) {
> > +                       /*
> > +                        * The ACPI tables themselves were malformed.
> > +                        * Dell Precision Workstation 410, 610 come here.
> > +                        */
> > +                       printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX
> > +                              "Invalid BIOS MADT, disabling ACPI\n");
> > +                       disable_acpi();
> > +               } else {
> >      
> This seems a very bad model. On todays systems turning off ACPI renders
> them basically useless. If the MADT is bogus its far better to pray that
> they rest of the ACPI is mostly sound and continue by ignoring the only
> dodgy table.
>    
I didn't make any change there; I just preserved the original behaviour 
of stopping all ACPI parsing when it returned -EINVAL (with a slightly 
more helpful comment).  My change was to make it continue to the I/O 
APICs if it returned something else (ie, -ENODEV).
    J

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel