[PATCH v2 1/2] arm64/acpi: panic when failed to init acpi table with acpi=force option

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 06:30:06PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 at 18:08, Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun at arm.com> wrote:

> > when the acpi=force option is used,
> > the system does not fall back to the device tree (DT).
> > If it fails to initialize the ACPI table, it cannot proceed further.
> > In such cases, the system should invoke panic() to avoid contradicting
> > the user's explicit intent, as failing or
> > proceeding with unintended behavior would violate their wishes.

> Calling panic() at this point does not achieve anything useful,
> though. Without ACPI tables or a DT, the only way to observe this
> panic message is by using earlycon= with an explicit MMIO address, and
> it might be better to limp on instead. Is there anything bad that
> might happen because of this, other than the user's wishes getting
> violated?

It does rather depend why the user specified acpi=force, it's kind of an
unusual thing to specify on most systems...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20241125/39673d3d/attachment.sig>