All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Zintakis <michael.zintakis@googlemail.com>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] Fintek f71882fg ACPI conflict
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 13:53:49 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FEC53DD.8050403@googlemail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120628144035.36ac75a0@endymion.delvare>


> Don't hold your breath though, it will take years before the problem
> actually gets solved for the end user - if that ever happens.
>   
Pretty grim that!

In the meantime, considering the specifics of my particular case and the 
memory regions involved (again, I think they are 0x290-0x297, a total of 
8 bytes in length according to the driver, though if someone more 
knowledgeable in the f71882fg driver specifics know otherwise, please 
feel free to correct this if that assumption is wrong), would it be 
possible to manually hack into the ACPI code and forcefully prevent it 
from claiming those memory regions and not get involved in "managing" 
that particular device?

I appreciate this could be quite ugly, but I am that desperate - I don't 
want ACPI doing the "managing" and want the f71822fg driver to have a 
free reign (without the risks, as previously noted!), albeit with the 
help of my bash script at times. :-)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Zintakis <michael.zintakis@googlemail.com>
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
	lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] Fintek f71882fg ACPI conflict
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:53:49 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FEC53DD.8050403@googlemail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120628144035.36ac75a0@endymion.delvare>


> Don't hold your breath though, it will take years before the problem
> actually gets solved for the end user - if that ever happens.
>   
Pretty grim that!

In the meantime, considering the specifics of my particular case and the 
memory regions involved (again, I think they are 0x290-0x297, a total of 
8 bytes in length according to the driver, though if someone more 
knowledgeable in the f71882fg driver specifics know otherwise, please 
feel free to correct this if that assumption is wrong), would it be 
possible to manually hack into the ACPI code and forcefully prevent it 
from claiming those memory regions and not get involved in "managing" 
that particular device?

I appreciate this could be quite ugly, but I am that desperate - I don't 
want ACPI doing the "managing" and want the f71822fg driver to have a 
free reign (without the risks, as previously noted!), albeit with the 
help of my bash script at times. :-)

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

  reply	other threads:[~2012-06-28 12:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-26 23:56 [lm-sensors] Fintek f71882fg ACPI conflict Michael Zintakis
2012-06-27 17:15 ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-27 17:15   ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2012-06-27 23:00   ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-27 23:00     ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-28  1:45     ` Matthew Garrett
2012-06-28  1:45       ` Matthew Garrett
2012-06-28 11:15       ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-28 11:15         ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-28 12:40         ` Jean Delvare
2012-06-28 12:40           ` Jean Delvare
2012-06-28 12:53           ` Michael Zintakis [this message]
2012-06-28 12:53             ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-28 13:27             ` Jean Delvare
2012-06-28 13:27               ` Jean Delvare
2012-06-29  5:35               ` Robert Hancock
2012-06-29  5:35                 ` Robert Hancock
2012-06-29 12:11                 ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-29 12:11                   ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-29 16:34                   ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-29 16:34                     ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-28  5:20     ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-28  5:20       ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-28 11:31       ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-28 11:31         ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-28 17:12         ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-28 17:12           ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-28 17:39           ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-28 17:39             ` Michael Zintakis
2012-06-28 18:57             ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-28 18:57               ` Guenter Roeck
2012-06-28  3:15 ` Andrey Repin
2012-06-28 11:36 ` Michael Zintakis

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4FEC53DD.8050403@googlemail.com \
    --to=michael.zintakis@googlemail.com \
    --cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=lenb@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
    --cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.