From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] lpc_ich: Fix a 3.5 kernel regression for iTCO_wdt driver Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 22:55:43 +0100 Message-ID: <20120822215543.GA1954@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1344959772-23018-1-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com> <20120822195512.GI27604@spo001.leaseweb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:54495 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932343Ab2HVVzz (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Aug 2012 17:55:55 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120822195512.GI27604@spo001.leaseweb.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Wim Van Sebroeck Cc: Len Brown , Feng Tang , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Aaron Sierra , Bob Moore , Samuel Ortiz , Guenter Roeck On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 09:55:12PM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote: > Any idea why the acpi_check_resource_conflict() check gives a conflict? Because the resource range is declared in ACPI and we assume that that means the firmware wants to scribble on it. We'd need the output of acpidump to work out whether that's safe or not. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org