lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUG] x86: reboot doesn't reboot
On 2014/4/4 8:12, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 04/03/2014 04:52 PM, Li, Aubrey wrote:
>> On 2014/4/4 7:40, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>> On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 07:23:32 +0800
>>> "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can you please send the dmi table out?
>>>
>>> I already did as a gz attachment to H. Peter. You were on the Cc, did
>>> you not receive it?
>>>
>> Oh, I got it. This is a Preproduction machine.
>> When reboot failed via a method (=e or =p), there are two case.
>>
>> Case 1: this method do nothing, pass the attempt chance to the next method
>> Case 2: this method hangs the system
>>
>> I want to know if CF9 is case 1 or case 2. Could you please try the following
>> patch *without* any reboot parameters?
>>
>> (1) If we didn't see any string, then EFI hangs your box.
>> (2) if we see the first string but not the second one, CF9 hangs your box
>> (3) if we see both, couldn't be, because BIOS works on your box.
>>
>
> Given that this machine doesn't have EFI, it seems kind of obvious, no?
>
> -hpa

Yes. it should be but I want to confirm.

The current situation is,
- we have one(do we know more?) preproduction machine hangs by CF9.
- We have more than one(could be thousand known) production machine
works by CF9.

So, if I understand correctly(please correct me if I was wrong), I don't
think the justification is enough to revert the patch. The patch
includes EFI, CF9 and BIOS.

I'm open to make Steven's machine work:
(1) remove CF9
(2) add DMI table
(3) any other idea without a regression.

I prefer (2) or (3) if better because if we do (1) we will probably
receive some other regression reports.

Thanks,
-Aubrey


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-04 03:41    [W:0.208 / U:1.700 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site