On 9/22/07, Robert Hancock <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > No!
> >
> > MMCONFIG will not work with acpi=off any more.
>
> I don't think this is unreasonable. The ACPI MCFG table is how we are
> supposed to learn about the area in the first place. If we can't get the
> table location via an approved mechanism, and can't validate it doesn't
> overlap with another memory reservation or something, I really don't
> think we should be using it.
>
> I don't think it's much of an issue anyway - the chances that somebody
> will want to run without ACPI on a system with MCFG are pretty low given
> that you'll end up losing a bunch of functionality (not least of which
> is multi-cores).
with acpi=off, that we do lose some features including acpi hotplug
and power management feature...
but we don't lose anything about numa ( multi-cores...) and
bus-numa... (we get these info from NB pci conf for AMD rev C, rev E,
rev F, and Fam 10 opteron)...
Finally we lose bugs introduced by ACPI code ...
YH
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
