Hi!
> > Defaults are not right solution; system should still work if I select
> > non-default settings. Which you claim is not a case, but you don't see
> > why you should fix it.
>
> If something is implemented using IPMI, then IPMI has to be there to
> use it. Matthew's statement was:
>
>
Hi!
Defaults are not right solution; system should still work if I select
non-default settings. Which you claim is not a case, but you don't see
why you should fix it.
If something is implemented using IPMI, then IPMI has to be there to
use it. Matthew's statement was:
For example,
On 03/13/2014 03:38 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Thu 2014-03-13 07:24:36, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 08:22 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> On Wed 2014-03-12 23:22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
No. The power meter driver knows nothing about IPMI. It makes no IPMI
calls.
On Thu 2014-03-13 07:24:36, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 08:22 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Wed 2014-03-12 23:22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > No. The power meter driver knows nothing about IPMI. It makes no IPMI
> > > calls. There's no requirement that a vendor implement
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 08:22 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2014-03-12 23:22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > No. The power meter driver knows nothing about IPMI. It makes no IPMI
> > calls. There's no requirement that a vendor implement it via IPMI.
>
> Yet you claim that IMPI is needed for
On Wed 2014-03-12 23:22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 00:00 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > On Tue 2014-02-18 23:15:08, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > For example, if you load the ACPI power meter driver before you've
> > > installed the ACPI IPMI driver you'll typically get
On Wed 2014-03-12 23:22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 00:00 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Tue 2014-02-18 23:15:08, Matthew Garrett wrote:
For example, if you load the ACPI power meter driver before you've
installed the ACPI IPMI driver you'll typically get failures
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 08:22 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2014-03-12 23:22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
No. The power meter driver knows nothing about IPMI. It makes no IPMI
calls. There's no requirement that a vendor implement it via IPMI.
Yet you claim that IMPI is needed for that, and
On Thu 2014-03-13 07:24:36, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 08:22 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2014-03-12 23:22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
No. The power meter driver knows nothing about IPMI. It makes no IPMI
calls. There's no requirement that a vendor implement it via
On 03/13/2014 03:38 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Thu 2014-03-13 07:24:36, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 08:22 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2014-03-12 23:22:49, Matthew Garrett wrote:
No. The power meter driver knows nothing about IPMI. It makes no IPMI
calls. There's no
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 00:00 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2014-02-18 23:15:08, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > For example, if you load the ACPI power meter driver before you've
> > installed the ACPI IPMI driver you'll typically get failures (most
> > vendors implement it via IPMI).
>
> Would
On Tue 2014-02-18 23:15:08, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:26 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:28:29 AM Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > >
> > > The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
> > > core. Systems that
On Tue 2014-02-18 23:15:08, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:26 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:28:29 AM Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that declare ACPI
On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 00:00 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
On Tue 2014-02-18 23:15:08, Matthew Garrett wrote:
For example, if you load the ACPI power meter driver before you've
installed the ACPI IPMI driver you'll typically get failures (most
vendors implement it via IPMI).
Would the right
Hi,
> From: linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Garrett
> Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:13 AM
>
> On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 02:17 +, Zheng, Lv wrote:
>
> > In fact there is a workaround solution I've posted here:
> >
Hi,
From: linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Matthew Garrett
Sent: Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:13 AM
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 02:17 +, Zheng, Lv wrote:
In fact there is a workaround solution I've posted here:
On 02/21/2014 09:51 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 07:37 -0600, Corey Minyard wrote:
>
>> However, the basic problem is that hardware vendors produce hardware
>> that sucks and then expect software to fix all the problems. Most IPMI
>> interfaces don't have interrupts, so they
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:13:13AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 17:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:09:42PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:45 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The ACPI spec requires IPMI
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 02:17:12AM +, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry for interrupting you.
> I have some information that may be helpful for your discussion.
> Please find them in the inlined replies.
> Well, I don't want to join the fight, just for your informations. :-)
I don't want to
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 02:17 +, Zheng, Lv wrote:
> In fact there is a workaround solution I've posted here:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2831851/
> The updated version of this patch can be found at:
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=112611
> It is the acpi-ipmi13.patch
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 07:37 -0600, Corey Minyard wrote:
> However, the basic problem is that hardware vendors produce hardware
> that sucks and then expect software to fix all the problems. Most IPMI
> interfaces don't have interrupts, so they have to be polled. Then they
> add important
On 02/20/2014 03:00 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
>>>
This is also a problem for systems with functional BMCs.
On 02/20/2014 03:00 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
This is also a problem for systems with functional BMCs. Our
large
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 07:37 -0600, Corey Minyard wrote:
However, the basic problem is that hardware vendors produce hardware
that sucks and then expect software to fix all the problems. Most IPMI
interfaces don't have interrupts, so they have to be polled. Then they
add important interfaces
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 02:17 +, Zheng, Lv wrote:
In fact there is a workaround solution I've posted here:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2831851/
The updated version of this patch can be found at:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=112611
It is the acpi-ipmi13.patch file.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 02:17:12AM +, Zheng, Lv wrote:
Hi,
Sorry for interrupting you.
I have some information that may be helpful for your discussion.
Please find them in the inlined replies.
Well, I don't want to join the fight, just for your informations. :-)
I don't want to join
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 12:13:13AM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 17:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:09:42PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:45 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
The ACPI spec requires IPMI functionality
On 02/21/2014 09:51 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 07:37 -0600, Corey Minyard wrote:
However, the basic problem is that hardware vendors produce hardware
that sucks and then expect software to fix all the problems. Most IPMI
interfaces don't have interrupts, so they have to
Hi,
Sorry for interrupting you.
I have some information that may be helpful for your discussion.
Please find them in the inlined replies.
Well, I don't want to join the fight, just for your informations. :-)
> From: linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 17:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:09:42PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:45 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > >
> > > The ACPI spec requires IPMI functionality before a module loads at
> > > boot time? And the kernel is
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:09:42PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:45 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:26:45PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> > > Because I'm trying to ensure that the default behaviour of the kernel is
> > > to *work*.
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 02:14:58 PM Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:28:29AM -0500, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
> > core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
> >
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:45 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:26:45PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Because I'm trying to ensure that the default behaviour of the kernel is
> > to *work*. Defaulting to having IPMI be modular means that the default
> > behaviour of the
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:28:29AM -0500, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
> core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
> time, including during kernel initialisation. These accesses will fail
>
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:26:45PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:06 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:39:23PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:28 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > >
> > > > For some customers _any_
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:06 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:39:23PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:28 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> >
> > > For some customers _any_ amount is significant, especially
> > > on large clustered systems where the
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:39:23PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:28 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
>
> > For some customers _any_ amount is significant, especially
> > on large clustered systems where the amount is multiplied
> > by tens or hundreds of thousands of nodes.
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:49 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > You appear to be saying "SGI ship hardware that doesn't work. We don't
> > know why it doesn't work and we're not interested in fixing it, so we'd
> > prefer the default
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
>
> > There are any number of reasons why a BMC may not respond.
> > BMCs are notorious for being flakey, with different types
> > of BMCs that may or may not be reliable.
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:28 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> For some customers _any_ amount is significant, especially
> on large clustered systems where the amount is multiplied
> by tens or hundreds of thousands of nodes.
>
> You many not think wasting their cpu cycles is important, but they do.
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:00:48PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is also a problem for
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> >
> > > This is also a problem for systems with functional BMCs. Our
> > > large cluster systems do all IPMI
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
>
> > This is also a problem for systems with functional BMCs. Our
> > large cluster systems do all IPMI traffic (monitoring) through
> > a system controller back door. We
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> Why build a driver into the kernel?
Because it provides functionality that other drivers may need without
there being any mechanism to provide an explicit dependency. The same
reason we build the ACPI embedded controller driver into the
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:16:22PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:14 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
>
> > The distro that added this change created all sorts of support
> > problems. Problems include kipmi0 spinning at 100% of cpu
> > (creating a performance hit) and long
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:14 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> The distro that added this change created all sorts of support
> problems. Problems include kipmi0 spinning at 100% of cpu
> (creating a performance hit) and long boot delays (as the
> kernel tries to talk to a BMC that will never
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:28:29AM -0500, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
> core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
> time, including during kernel initialisation. These accesses will fail
>
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:28:29AM -0500, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
time, including during kernel initialisation. These accesses will fail
unless
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:14 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
The distro that added this change created all sorts of support
problems. Problems include kipmi0 spinning at 100% of cpu
(creating a performance hit) and long boot delays (as the
kernel tries to talk to a BMC that will never respond).
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:16:22PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:14 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
The distro that added this change created all sorts of support
problems. Problems include kipmi0 spinning at 100% of cpu
(creating a performance hit) and long boot
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
Why build a driver into the kernel?
Because it provides functionality that other drivers may need without
there being any mechanism to provide an explicit dependency. The same
reason we build the ACPI embedded controller driver into the
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
This is also a problem for systems with functional BMCs. Our
large cluster systems do all IPMI traffic (monitoring) through
a system controller back door. We do not
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
This is also a problem for systems with functional BMCs. Our
large cluster systems do all IPMI traffic
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:00:48PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
This is also a problem for systems with
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:28 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
For some customers _any_ amount is significant, especially
on large clustered systems where the amount is multiplied
by tens or hundreds of thousands of nodes.
You many not think wasting their cpu cycles is important, but they do.
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 14:40 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
There are any number of reasons why a BMC may not respond.
BMCs are notorious for being flakey, with different types
of BMCs that may or may not be reliable. You do
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:49 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 08:46:04PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
You appear to be saying SGI ship hardware that doesn't work. We don't
know why it doesn't work and we're not interested in fixing it, so we'd
prefer the default kernel
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:39:23PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:28 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
For some customers _any_ amount is significant, especially
on large clustered systems where the amount is multiplied
by tens or hundreds of thousands of nodes.
You
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:06 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:39:23PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:28 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
For some customers _any_ amount is significant, especially
on large clustered systems where the amount is
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:26:45PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:06 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:39:23PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 15:28 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
For some customers _any_ amount is
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:28:29AM -0500, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
time, including during kernel initialisation. These accesses will fail
unless
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:45 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:26:45PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Because I'm trying to ensure that the default behaviour of the kernel is
to *work*. Defaulting to having IPMI be modular means that the default
behaviour of the kernel,
On Thursday, February 20, 2014 02:14:58 PM Russ Anderson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:28:29AM -0500, Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
time,
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:09:42PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:45 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:26:45PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
Because I'm trying to ensure that the default behaviour of the kernel is
to *work*. Defaulting to
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 17:59 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:09:42PM +, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 16:45 -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
The ACPI spec requires IPMI functionality before a module loads at
boot time? And the kernel is *broken* if
Hi,
Sorry for interrupting you.
I have some information that may be helpful for your discussion.
Please find them in the inlined replies.
Well, I don't want to join the fight, just for your informations. :-)
From: linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-acpi-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On
I just queued it up, too, but that's fine. This seems to be a good idea
with the way ACPI is going.
Acked-by: Corey Minyard
On 02/18/2014 06:45 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:25:02 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:35 +0100, Rafael J.
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:25:02 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:35 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:15:08 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > For example, if you load the ACPI power meter driver before you've
> > > installed the ACPI IPMI
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:35 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:15:08 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > For example, if you load the ACPI power meter driver before you've
> > installed the ACPI IPMI driver you'll typically get failures (most
> > vendors implement it via
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:15:08 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:26 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:28:29 AM Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > >
> > > The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
> > > core.
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:26 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:28:29 AM Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >
> > The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
> > core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
> >
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:28:29 AM Matthew Garrett wrote:
>
> The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
> core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
> time, including during kernel initialisation. These accesses will fail
>
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
time, including during kernel initialisation. These accesses will fail
unless the ACPI IPMI driver is present, and undesirable system behaviour
may
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
time, including during kernel initialisation. These accesses will fail
unless the ACPI IPMI driver is present, and undesirable system behaviour
may
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:28:29 AM Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
time, including during kernel initialisation. These accesses will fail
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:26 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:28:29 AM Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that declare ACPI operation regions may reference them at any
time,
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:15:08 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:26 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:28:29 AM Matthew Garrett wrote:
The ACPI IPMI driver implements IPMI operation region support for the ACPI
core. Systems that
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:35 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:15:08 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
For example, if you load the ACPI power meter driver before you've
installed the ACPI IPMI driver you'll typically get failures (most
vendors implement it via IPMI).
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:25:02 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:35 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:15:08 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
For example, if you load the ACPI power meter driver before you've
installed the ACPI IPMI driver
I just queued it up, too, but that's fine. This seems to be a good idea
with the way ACPI is going.
Acked-by: Corey Minyard cminy...@mvista.com
On 02/18/2014 06:45 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014 11:25:02 PM Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 00:35 +0100,
80 matches
Mail list logo
