Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751870AbaDDB1z (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2014 21:27:55 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:34575 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750891AbaDDB1w (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Apr 2014 21:27:52 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,791,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="514519273" Message-ID: <533E0A94.5040007@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 09:27:48 +0800 From: "Li, Aubrey" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" , Steven Rostedt CC: Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , LKML , Thomas Gleixner , Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [BUG] x86: reboot doesn't reboot References: <20140403021411.6236996f@gandalf.local.home> <070BEF4AC20468458C22969097656CD91163106C@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> <533D001A.5030802@linux.intel.com> <20140403094155.04cc00bc@gandalf.local.home> <533D6BE7.3020608@zytor.com> <20140403104721.5f6c32b6@gandalf.local.home> <20140403111711.5bed4ff7@gandalf.local.home> <533D7C4F.4010504@zytor.com> <533D7C93.7080105@zytor.com> <20140403113921.23dceb75@gandalf.local.home> <533D8516.1040803@zytor.com> <20140403121314.246b03a7@gandalf.local.home> <533DED74.6050202@linux.intel.com> <20140403194018.7c67aec7@gandalf.local.home> <533DF455.4040908@linux.intel.com> <533DF8D2.9060508@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <533DF8D2.9060508@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2014/4/4 8:12, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 04/03/2014 04:52 PM, Li, Aubrey wrote: >> On 2014/4/4 7:40, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>> On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 07:23:32 +0800 >>> "Li, Aubrey" wrote: >>> >>>> Can you please send the dmi table out? >>> >>> I already did as a gz attachment to H. Peter. You were on the Cc, did >>> you not receive it? >>> >> Oh, I got it. This is a Preproduction machine. >> When reboot failed via a method (=e or =p), there are two case. >> >> Case 1: this method do nothing, pass the attempt chance to the next method >> Case 2: this method hangs the system >> >> I want to know if CF9 is case 1 or case 2. Could you please try the following >> patch *without* any reboot parameters? >> >> (1) If we didn't see any string, then EFI hangs your box. >> (2) if we see the first string but not the second one, CF9 hangs your box >> (3) if we see both, couldn't be, because BIOS works on your box. >> > > Given that this machine doesn't have EFI, it seems kind of obvious, no? > > -hpa Yes. it should be but I want to confirm. The current situation is, - we have one(do we know more?) preproduction machine hangs by CF9. - We have more than one(could be thousand known) production machine works by CF9. So, if I understand correctly(please correct me if I was wrong), I don't think the justification is enough to revert the patch. The patch includes EFI, CF9 and BIOS. I'm open to make Steven's machine work: (1) remove CF9 (2) add DMI table (3) any other idea without a regression. I prefer (2) or (3) if better because if we do (1) we will probably receive some other regression reports. Thanks, -Aubrey -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/