Check for broken HP bioses in ahci.c appears too broad

Check for broken HP bioses in ahci.c appears too broad

[Matthew Garrett]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533402 describes a case 
where a machine is falling foul of the hp dv6 check in ahci.c. However, 
BIOS version F.04 appears to be the latest available for this machine - 
I suspect that the dv6 parameter is too broad and is picking up machines 
outside those with the affected BIOSes.

Heinz, could you attach the contents of 
/sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/product_name, 
/sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/product_version and 
/sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/bios_*?

-- 
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org

Re: Check for broken HP bioses in ahci.c appears too broad

[Heinz Mauelshagen]

On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 16:28 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533402 describes a case 
> where a machine is falling foul of the hp dv6 check in ahci.c. However, 
> BIOS version F.04 appears to be the latest available for this machine - 
> I suspect that the dv6 parameter is too broad and is picking up machines 
> outside those with the affected BIOSes.
> 
> Heinz, could you attach the contents of 
> /sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/product_name, 
> /sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/product_version and 
> /sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/bios_*?


Added to bz.

Heinz

Re: Check for broken HP bioses in ahci.c appears too broad

[Tejun Heo]

Heinz Mauelshagen wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 16:28 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533402 describes a case 
>> where a machine is falling foul of the hp dv6 check in ahci.c. However, 
>> BIOS version F.04 appears to be the latest available for this machine - 
>> I suspect that the dv6 parameter is too broad and is picking up machines 
>> outside those with the affected BIOSes.
>>
>> Heinz, could you attach the contents of 
>> /sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/product_name, 
>> /sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/product_version and 
>> /sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/bios_*?

Maybe we should use date instead of version?

Thanks.

-- 
tejun