Re: [patch 11/18] pnpacpi: reject ACPI_PRODUCER resources

Shaohua Li
2006-06-30T01:32:48Z

On Thu, 2006-06-29 at 12:38 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 June 2006 19:13, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-06-28 at 10:55 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 27 June 2006 19:02, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > > > Or could we take this way, merge both patches (both patches are good to
> > > > me), which should be safer. Anyway, it doesn't make sense to export root
> > > > bridge to pnp layer to me.
> > >
> > > One reason I don't like the blacklist is because it just papers over
> > > the problem without leaving a clue about how to really solve it.
> > > For example, if PNP is enhanced later to comprehend resource producers,
> > > we won't know to go back and remove things from the blacklist.
> > So lets have a note there. It (no blacklist) is meaningful to have all
> > ACPI devices handled by PNP layer, but currently not. We don't expect a
> > PNP driver for root bridge. And we will take risk of buggy BIOS.
>
> Assuming we apply the first patch, a blacklist entry is neither
> necessary (because the PNPACPI producer check covers it) nor
> sufficient (because non-PNP0A03 devices may also have producer
> resources).
>
> It's true that blacklisting PNP0A03 will prevent problems if a BIOS
> has buggy _CRS data for such a device. But it will also hide Linux
> problems like the one I fixed here:
> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-acpi&m=113890268621542&w=2
>
> So I think we should not blacklist PNP0A03 until we discover a specific
> problem that requires that.
Looks you just want it to find bug :). If you insist, I'm fine with your
proposal.

Thanks,
SHaohua