From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: keith mannthey Subject: Re: one more ACPI Error (utglobal-0125): Unknown exception code: 0xFFFFFFEA [Re: 2.6.18-rc4-mm3] Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 11:14:15 -0700 Message-ID: <1157566456.5713.4.camel@keithlap> References: <49303.24.9.204.52.1157080555.squirrel@mail.cce.hp.com> <1157151674.5656.21.camel@keithlap> <200609011720.36318.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> Reply-To: kmannth@us.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:21962 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751491AbWIFSOV (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2006 14:14:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200609011720.36318.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Len Brown , "Moore, Robert" , "Li, Shaohua" , Mattia Dongili , Andrew Morton , lkml , linux acpi , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 17:20 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Friday 01 September 2006 17:01, keith mannthey wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 21:15 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > The current ACPI driver binding algorithm in acpi_bus_find_driver() > > > looks at each driver, checking whether it can match either the _HID > > > or the _CID of a device. Since we try the motherboard driver first, > > > it matches the memory device _CID. > > > > Ok I reverted the motherboard driver patch and cooked up the following > > patch that works for my issue. > > > > It creates the idea that acpi_match_ids has a type of request to check > > against for _HID, _CID or both. See acpi_bus_match_req. I then fix up > > all the needed callers to change the API to acpi_match_ids and > > acpi_bus_match and have callers can say what they want to match > > against. > > > > Then in acpi_bus_find_driver I have it do 2 passes to search for _HID > > first then the _CID. > > > > Does this look like it is in the right ballpark or should we be doing > > something else? Built/tested against 2.6.18-rc4-mm3. > > Conceptually I like this much better than mucking with the motherboard > driver. I'm not sure the important people have signed off on this > strategy of binding with _HID first, then _CID (hi, Len :-)) Maybe > there are ramifications that we need to consider. But I think it > is a better match for "what people expect should happen." ACPI folks can we get some response to this? This problem has been reported a few times against the -mm tree and I would like to get the proper fix (whatever it is) upstream sometime soon. Bjorn thanks for the help and for pointing the error reports in the right direction. Thanks, Keith From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751497AbWIFSOY (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2006 14:14:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751494AbWIFSOY (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2006 14:14:24 -0400 Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.149]:21962 "EHLO e31.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751491AbWIFSOV (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Sep 2006 14:14:21 -0400 Subject: Re: one more ACPI Error (utglobal-0125): Unknown exception code: 0xFFFFFFEA [Re: 2.6.18-rc4-mm3] From: keith mannthey Reply-To: kmannth@us.ibm.com To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Len Brown , "Moore, Robert" , "Li, Shaohua" , Mattia Dongili , Andrew Morton , lkml , linux acpi , KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki In-Reply-To: <200609011720.36318.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> References: <49303.24.9.204.52.1157080555.squirrel@mail.cce.hp.com> <1157151674.5656.21.camel@keithlap> <200609011720.36318.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Linux Technology Center IBM Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 11:14:15 -0700 Message-Id: <1157566456.5713.4.camel@keithlap> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 (2.0.4-4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 17:20 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Friday 01 September 2006 17:01, keith mannthey wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 21:15 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > The current ACPI driver binding algorithm in acpi_bus_find_driver() > > > looks at each driver, checking whether it can match either the _HID > > > or the _CID of a device. Since we try the motherboard driver first, > > > it matches the memory device _CID. > > > > Ok I reverted the motherboard driver patch and cooked up the following > > patch that works for my issue. > > > > It creates the idea that acpi_match_ids has a type of request to check > > against for _HID, _CID or both. See acpi_bus_match_req. I then fix up > > all the needed callers to change the API to acpi_match_ids and > > acpi_bus_match and have callers can say what they want to match > > against. > > > > Then in acpi_bus_find_driver I have it do 2 passes to search for _HID > > first then the _CID. > > > > Does this look like it is in the right ballpark or should we be doing > > something else? Built/tested against 2.6.18-rc4-mm3. > > Conceptually I like this much better than mucking with the motherboard > driver. I'm not sure the important people have signed off on this > strategy of binding with _HID first, then _CID (hi, Len :-)) Maybe > there are ramifications that we need to consider. But I think it > is a better match for "what people expect should happen." ACPI folks can we get some response to this? This problem has been reported a few times against the -mm tree and I would like to get the proper fix (whatever it is) upstream sometime soon. Bjorn thanks for the help and for pointing the error reports in the right direction. Thanks, Keith