From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@labs.coraid.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:20:40 -0500
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Message-ID: <95acb22e4c0cec7d7a4490ff738fa2ce@coraid.com>
In-Reply-To: <e8888e046d6af4ac7f84ec61882b1f75@coraid.com>
References: <601efb4e455d06e4f21af17a0daf8900@ladd.quanstro.net>
	<AANLkTimRk72qcgP1aiFs12NTuK+x4a+QR+zoVFxu3hkb@mail.gmail.com>
	<e8888e046d6af4ac7f84ec61882b1f75@coraid.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] tech writer humor
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b32278c8-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> > >        19.4.22
> > >        APICID
> > >        This register uniquely identifies an APIC in the system. This register is not used by
> > >        OS'es anymore and is still implemented in hardware because of FUD.
> > >
> > > (Intel® 5520 chipset and Intel® 5500 chipset datasheet pub 321328)
> >
> > Did intel claim that the OSes should be using ACPI? What do they use instead?
> >
> > ron
> > p.s. I appreciate the humor but it does lead to a serious question.
>
> afik, acpi has nothing to do with this problem.  i believe this particular
> tech writer intends to claim that nobody uses physical addressing anymore.
> but i believe bios still needs to use physical addressing before logical addressing
> is established.  so i think the writer may be speaking a misleading half
> of the whole story.

i think i was unclear.  by physical vs. logical addressing i mean of course of
the various system apics, not of memory.

in any event, the logical addressing is the responsibility of the os, so acpi
doesn't provide it either.  (annoying how acpi and apic obvious anagrams.)

- erik