From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on sa.int.altlinux.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 From: Petr Tesarik Organization: SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. To: Linux console tools development discussion Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:27:11 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.37.6-0.19-default; KDE/4.6.0; i686; ; ) References: <201207270909.07319.ptesarik@suse.cz> <5015A6BB.5030507@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5015A6BB.5030507@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <201207301927.11868.ptesarik@suse.cz> Subject: Re: [kbd] [PATCH v2] setleds: add option to reset state to the BIOS default X-BeenThere: kbd@lists.altlinux.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Linux console tools development discussion List-Id: Linux console tools development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:27:08 -0000 Archived-At: List-Archive: Hi Alexey, glad you didn't smash the idea from an ideological standpoint. Dne Ne 29. =C4=8Dervence 2012 23:10:19 Alexey Gladkov napsal(a): > 27.07.2012 11:09, Petr Tesarik wrote: > > +#if defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__) > > +# define HAVE_BIOS 1 >=20 > I think it's strange condition. It is, indeed. For one thing, some Itanium machines also have the standard = PC=20 BIOS Data Area (BDA), and they don't get this new feature. Unfortunately, s= ome=20 (early?) SGI Altix machines don't have physical memory at 0x400, and they=20 don't handle accesses to non-existent RAM very well (read: freeze or reboot= ).=20 OTOH detecting the machine model and maintaining a blacklist or whitelist o= f=20 well-known IA-64 systems in setleds sounds like overkill, especially for a= =20 dying platform. So, I didn't include them. > How your code will work on the EFI ? Well, UEFI will work just fine, same with Intel's EFI, because they include= a=20 Compatibility Support Module (CSM), which (among other things) initializes= =20 legacy BDA. Yes, some machines don't do that properly (IIRC Phoenix issued = an=20 errata a few years ago exactly to fix LED states in the BDA). Even Apple includes a CSM for their EFI implementation... I would be a bit more concerned about embedded hardware like the one I used= to=20 have in one of my ancient D-Link routers in the early 2000's, which emulate= d=20 an x86 on top of ICplus Corp. IC175. However, platforms like this usually r= un=20 in a well-controlled environment, so the firmware writer will probably not= =20 even attemp to use this new setleds feature. In any case, even if the BDA is not initialized properly, the worst thing t= hat=20 happens is that the LEDs are set incorrectly when you run "setleds bios". Petr Tesarik SUSE Linux