[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openbsd-misc
Subject:    Re: kernel panic from sys/dev/acpi/dsdt.c rev1.210 change
From:       patrick keshishian <pkeshish () gmail ! com>
Date:       2014-06-27 20:22:16
Message-ID: CAN0yQBqyJpKr3YzBN2qg5LLAiE-ymKK1ONVgp_bW-JFKajgc=Q () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 6/27/14, Theo de Raadt <deraadt@cvs.openbsd.org> wrote:
>> On 2014-06-26, Scott Vanderbilt <lists@datagenic.com> wrote:
>> > Having done a little man page reading on boot-time configuration, I
>> > learned about the existence of ukc. I'm wondering whether something
>> > like
>> >
>> >    ukc> disable acpi0
>> >
>> > might circumvent the kernel panic and allow the boot to successfully
>> > complete. I'm hoping that since this is a server, ACPI is non-essential.
>> >
>> > Just grasping at straws in an effort to get this machine up and running
>> >
>> > again.
>>
>> I think you should consider ACPI essential on pretty much any x86
>> machine from the last 4-5 years or so - servers, laptops, standard PCs.
>
> Yes, ACPI is essential.  It is the modern way to interface to the hardware;
> it is the modern BIOS API.

viva pragmatism!
	http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#45
:)
--patrick


> The other BIOS interfaces (MPBIOS and PCIBIOS) are totally unreliable and
> rotting on most machines these days.   The vendors include support, but
> they
> do not verify their correctness.
>
>> In an emergency such as this you might get away with it briefly, but
>> some devices are likely not to work, and it's not recommended leaving
>> it like that for any length of time, ACPI is involved in a lot of
>> system controls (thermal controls, power etc) and most modern machines
>> are just not designed/tested to work without it.
>
> Stuart is correct.  Those of you turning off ACPI are relying on an
> interface model we have repeatedly described as broken.

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]