On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:21:24PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jan 2014, Aravind Gopalakrishnan wrote:
> > We might want to still have a software fix for this just in case
> > someone uses older BIOSes..
>
> There is no "just in case" when it comes to someone using outdated firmware.
> It is a *given*, except for hardware that is only used in HPC and multiple
> (> 2) socket servers/workstations (which might be the case here, I don't
> know what processors we're talking about).
>
> The vast majority of PC users will never update their firmware, unless the
> update is automatically offered to them, and sometimes not even in that
> case.
We also cannot carry *every* erratum workaround in the kernel just
because people don't update firmware. Firmware is becoming ubiquitous,
sadly, and because of that, admins should provision for firmware
upgrades too.
Besides, *even* if we put *all* errata fixes in the kernel, you'd need
to update it anyway and reboot. In this case, you can just as well
update your firmware instead, which involves that same reboot.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
