On 228, 08 16, 2005 at 01:36:19AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 23:58:43 CDT, Michael E Brown said:
>
> > No, this is an _EXCELLENT_ reason why _LESS_ of this should be in the
> > kernel. Why should we have to duplicate a _TON_ of code inside the
> > kernel to figure out which platform we are on, and then look up in a
> > table which method to use for that platform? We have a _MUCH_ nicer
> > programming environment available to us in userspace where we can use
> > things like libsmbios to look up the platform type, then look in an
> > easily-updateable text file which smi type to use. In general, plugging
> > the wrong value here is a no-op.
>
> You'll still need to do some *very* basic checking - there's fairly
> scary-looking 'outb' call in callintf_smi() and host_control_smi() that
> seems to
> be totally too trusting that The Right Thing is located at address
> CMOS_BASE_PORT:
>
> + for (index = PE1300_CMOS_CMD_STRUCT_PTR;
> + index < (PE1300_CMOS_CMD_STRUCT_PTR + 4);
> + index++) {
> + outb(index,
> + (CMOS_BASE_PORT + CMOS_PAGE2_INDEX_PORT_PIIX4));
> + outb(*data++,
> + (CMOS_BASE_PORT + CMOS_PAGE2_DATA_PORT_PIIX4));
> + }
>
> This Dell C840 has an 845, not a PIIX. What just got toasted if this driver
> gets called?
>
> Can we have a check that the machine is (a) a Dell and (b) has a PIIX and (c)
> the
> PIIX has a functional SMI behind it, before we start doing outb() calls?What about dmi_check_system() ? -- Andrey Panin | Linux and UNIX system administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] | PGP key: wwwkeys.pgp.net
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
