Re: ACPI patches for Linux-2.6.23-rc3

[Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>]

On Friday 24 August 2007 04:07, Zhang Rui wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 03:20 -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> > please speak up if you see any problem with these patches.
> > Also, please let me know if I've missed something you
> > think needs to make 2.6.23.
> > 
> What about the latest patch in bug 8798?
> It can fix the duplicate name problem without changing the
> procfs generic code.

Do we need to null-terminate bus_id?

-Len
----------
Subject: hack duplicate name "VID" problem on T61
From: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>

This can only fix the problem that more than one video bus device
have the same AML name "VID".
ie. the proc I/F for the second "VID" video bus device is located under
/proc/acpi/video/VID1/...

As this is really rare and the ACPI proc I/F is a legacy feature that
we are planning to remove.
We won't provide a generic solution for this problem.

Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/video.c |    8 ++++++++
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

Index: linux-2.6.23-rc3/drivers/acpi/video.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.23-rc3.orig/drivers/acpi/video.c
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc3/drivers/acpi/video.c
@@ -1833,6 +1833,7 @@ static void acpi_video_device_notify(acp
 	return;
 }
 
+static int instance;
 static int acpi_video_bus_add(struct acpi_device *device)
 {
 	int result = 0;
@@ -1847,6 +1848,13 @@ static int acpi_video_bus_add(struct acp
 	if (!video)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
+	/* a hack to fix the duplicate name "VID" problem on T61 */
+	if (!strcmp(device->pnp.bus_id, "VID")) {
+		if (instance)
+			device->pnp.bus_id[3] = '0' + instance;
+		instance ++;
+	}
+
 	video->device = device;
 	strcpy(acpi_device_name(device), ACPI_VIDEO_BUS_NAME);
 	strcpy(acpi_device_class(device), ACPI_VIDEO_CLASS);