qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] acpi: pcihp: make pending delete expire in 5sec


From: Ani Sinha
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: pcihp: make pending delete expire in 5sec
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2023 18:02:37 +0530


> On 05-Apr-2023, at 5:57 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 02:03:32PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 05:59:06 -0400
>> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 11:24:16AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>>>>>> PS:
>>>>>> See commit message, Windows is not affected as it doesn't
>>>>>> clear GPE status bits during ACPI initialization
>>>>>> (at least the one version I've tested with, and I won't bet
>>>>>> on this with other versions or staying this way)    
>>>>> 
>>>>> So I am saying linux should match windows. Clearing GPE
>>>>> is a bad idea as you then miss events.  
>>>> 
>>>> I'd say it depends on if guest OS is able to handle hot[un]plug
>>>> at boot time when it enables GPE handlers (or any other time).
>>>> (My point of view here, it's a guest OS policy and management
>>>> layer should know what installed guest is capable of and what
>>>> quirks to use with it)
>>>> 
>>>> I'll try to send a kernel patch to remove GPEx.status clearing,
>>>> though it might be more complex than it seems,
>>>> hence I'm quite sceptical about it.  
>>> 
>>> In the world of ACPI, windows is basically the gold standard,
>>> whatever it does linux has to do ;)
>> I'd say other way around (with their limited acpi interpreter,
>> it's getting better though),
>> While linux basically is acpica reference code.
> 
> For a spec compliant acpi like ours maybe but on real hardware
> it is like this because BIOS vendors test their ACPI with windows only.

I thought they used bios bits :-) 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]