On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 08:05:42PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:

quoted text
>  It is the reverse -- checking the DSDT ID is coarser, matching all the
> systems that use the broken firmware.  With DMI we may face both false
> positives and false negatives which imply further maintenance actions.  
> Please note as proved over the years understanding of these issues seems
> to be problematic for people, so the result may be another round of
> discussions reinventing the wheel in a couple of years' time or so.

The DSDT can't be updated without the BIOS being updated, and the DMI 
information gives us a BIOS version string that can be matched against 
if a fixed version is ever released. I'd be in favour of doing it with 
DMI on the grounds that it's how we already handle machine-specific 
quirks rather than adding new code to do it.

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
--
unsubscribe notice
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/