On Thu, 2017-04-27 at 15:02 -0600, Daniel Drake wrote:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com wrote:
While in general DMI_SYS_VENDOR is commonly used, there are exceptions to the rule, such as the very machine I am working on at the moment which does have any useful DMI_SYS_VENDOR information (see below) Mengdong may be able to comment on why we took this direction.
I think it was probably due to our limited number of test machines all reporting better info via DMI_BOARD_VENDOR.
In a DMI database of 113 PC models that we have worked with here:
112 have correct/meaningful sys_vendor, 1 is useless (To be filled by OEM) 106 have correct board_vendor, 7 have incorrect or useless values
And awkwardly the one system that I'd like to match in UCM rules here has correct sys_vendor but bad board_vendor.
So given your larger database is showing better results for DMI_SYS_VENDOR it may be best to try this first and if that's NULL then use DMI_BOARD_VENDOR.
Would you care to submit a patch ? or Mengdong ? Sorry, I wont be able to get to this for a week due to some travel.
Thanks
Liam