From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Williamson Subject: RE: [ACPI] ACPI owner_id limit too low Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 15:21:10 -0700 Message-ID: <1134080471.2476.9.camel@tdi> References: <971FCB6690CD0E4898387DBF7552B90E03A96856@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <971FCB6690CD0E4898387DBF7552B90E03A96856@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Moore, Robert" Cc: "Brown, Len" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 14:03 -0800, Moore, Robert wrote: > We have increased the number of owner IDs to 255 in the most recent > version of ACPICA, 20051202. This should hit Linux soon. > > Additionally, we plan to conserve OwnerIDs by not using them for tables > that can never be unloaded, to be implemented in a future release. > However, 255 Ids should be plenty for now. > > Here is the text from the release memo: > > Increased the number of available Owner Ids for namespace object > tracking from 32 to 255. This should eliminate the OWNER_ID_LIMIT > exceptions seen on some machines with a large number of ACPI tables > (either static or dynamic). Hi Bob, Sorry if I wasn't clear, I'm worried about what happens in the interim. The problem will be fixed in ACPICA 20051202, but we have at least one, likely two stable kernels that will be tagged before that ACPICA version hits the upstream kernel. We can hit the owner_id limit fairly easily on a few development systems. How many stable kernels do we want out in the wild with such a low owner_id limit? Bumping it up to 64, while not ideal, is sufficient for our current usage, and I think the patch is trivial enough that it could be included quickly. Thanks, Alex -- Alex Williamson HP Linux & Open Source Lab