Re: [PATCH] x86/efi-bgrt: Switch all pr_err() to pr_debug() for invalid BGRT

From	Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH] x86/efi-bgrt: Switch all pr_err() to pr_debug() for invalid BGRT
Date	2016-05-01 00:50 +0200
Message-ID	<rtLS1-7cr-15@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <rsz6y-2T0-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <rszzA-3p7-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rsB8m-4NH-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <rsBrJ-4Yl-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <rtLIm-78D-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On 30/04/16 23:35, Matt Fleming wrote:
> (Adding Colin and Ricardo)
> 
> On Wed, 27 Apr, at 01:23:55PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>
>> How is an end user supposed to see such a message and report it to the
>> people that can fix it?  They can't.  So they report it in their
>> distributions bug tracker and it either gets closed as "yeah, firmware
>> sucks" or it sits there and rots in the hope that some day someone
>> will do something.
>>
>> I understand where you're coming from in a pre-production, development
>> environment but to be quite clear that is not the default environment
>> Linux is run in most of the time.  If this were a kernel warning, that
>> could be fixed with a kernel patch, then maybe it would be worth it.
>> It isn't though.
> 
> If the error messages in the BGRT driver make it impossible for end
> users to achieve a pretty boot experience then I agree, that is a
> kernel bug. BGRT is an exception to the usual rule about complaining
> loudly when we encounter firmware bugs simply because we're dealing
> with UIs in this case.
> 
> That's not to say we should give up reporting these kinds of invalid
> table issues to firmware developers altogether. There are other means
> of doing it, and comprising the wants of many end users for the
> benefit of few firmware developers (relatively) is just not sensible.
> 
> Colin, Ricardo, I haven't checked recently, are there ACPI BGRT
> validations tests in FWTS and LUV? Josh (Triplett), BITS would seem
> like a very good place to include these tests since it already has a
> bunch of ACPI table checks.
> 
fwts does have a BGRT test, although it is fairly trivial:

http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git/hwe/fwts.git/tree/src/acpi/bgrt/bgrt.c

Colin

Thread

Re: [PATCH] x86/efi-bgrt: Switch all pr_err() to pr_debug() for  invalid BGRT Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk> - 2016-05-01 00:40 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] x86/efi-bgrt: Switch all pr_err() to pr_debug() for  invalid BGRT Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> - 2016-05-01 00:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH] x86/efi-bgrt: Switch all pr_err() to pr_debug() for  invalid BGRT Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> - 2016-05-01 01:20 +0200

csiph-web