>>> Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 24.11.06 21:27 >>> >On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 08:53:08AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > > >It does appear to work w/out the patch. I've asked for a small bit > > >of diagnostics (below), perhaps you've got something you'd rather see? > > >I expect this to be a 24C0 LPC Bridge. > > > > Yes, that's what I'd have asked for. If it works, I expect the device > > code to be different, or both manufacturer and device code to be > > invalid. Depending on the outcome, perhaps we'll need an override > > option so that this test can be partially (i.e. just the device code > > part) or entirely (all the FWH detection) skipped. > > The base problem is the vague documentation of the whole > > detection mechanism - a lot of this I had to read between the lines. > >The bug report I referenced came back with this from that debug patch.. > >intel_rng: no version for "struct_module" found: kernel tainted. >intel_rng: pci vendor:device 8086:24c0 fwh_dec_en1 80 bios_cntl_val 2 mfc cb >dvc 88 >intel_rng: FWH not detected
Okay, this means the lock is being set by the BIOS, which disallows disabling BIOS (and thus accessing the FWH). By default, I think it is correct to consider the RNG not present in this case, however as previously indicated I think we should provide a way to force skipping the FWH test (with three levels - carry out, skip always, or skip if BIOS locked). I'll prepare a patch as soon as I can, but it might take a few days until I get to it. Jan - 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/
