Re: Re: "ACPI: Unable to start the ACPI Interpreter"

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>]

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 02:23:09AM +0800, Liwei wrote:
> On 28 June 2011 01:33, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hmm. Can you attach the full serial log and on the Linux kernel line have
> > 'loglevel=10 debug initcall_debug' please?
> 
> See attached.
> 
> >
> > Is the serial log when running under 2.6.32 any different? (up to the ACPI interpretter
> > blowing up)? What does the /proc/interrupts look under 2.6.32?
> 
> There's too much noise for me to compare, but I think they're more or
> less the same until the the interpreter blows up for 3.0 whereas
> 2.6.32 does not.

What is weird is:

1
[    3.970863] ACPI: SCI (IRQ9) allocation failed
[    3.970906] ACPI Exception: AE_NOT_ACQUIRED, Unable to install System Control Interrupt handler (20110413/evevent-119)
[    3.970911] ACPI: Unable to start the ACPI Interpreter

IRQ9.. It looks like it really wants to use 9 instead of 20.

Looking at the code it does:

144         status =
145             acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler((u32) acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt,
146                                               acpi_ev_sci_xrupt_handler,
147                                               acpi_gbl_gpe_xrupt_list_head);

So it uses the acpi_glb_FADT.sci_interrupt.  I think the best path
is to stick a bunch of printks  in drivers/acpi/osl.c in acpi_os_install_interrupt_handler
and see what gsi, acpi_gbl_FADT.sci_interrupt, and what 'irq' end up being.

> 
> I've attached the /proc/interrupts dump for both kernel versions. The
> difference to note is that IRQ 20 does appear in 2.6.32.
> 
> Also attached is the xen dmesg.

Ok, let me look at them in some more details.