From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Prarit Bhargava Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPICA: AcpiGetSleepTypeData: Failure to find \_Sx should not result in a loud warning [v2] Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 07:29:41 -0400 Message-ID: <5617A525.2070806@redhat.com> References: <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E37D36303A@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com> <1444243849-27929-1-git-send-email-prarit@redhat.com> <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E37D970F57@ORSMSX111.amr.corp.intel.com> <56167C58.8000405@redhat.com> <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E883BAC675E@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E883BAC67EE@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50441 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753984AbbJIL3m (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2015 07:29:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E883BAC67EE@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: "Zheng, Lv" , "Moore, Robert" , "devel@acpica.org" Cc: "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "Wysocki, Rafael J" On 10/09/2015 01:26 AM, Zheng, Lv wrote: > Please ignore this. > The fix is against the caller. > > Thanks and best regards > -Lv > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Devel [mailto:devel-bounces@acpica.org] On Behalf Of Zheng, Lv >> Sent: Friday, October 09, 2015 10:02 AM >> To: Prarit Bhargava; Moore, Robert; devel@acpica.org >> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; Wysocki, Rafael J >> Subject: Re: [Devel] [PATCH] ACPICA: AcpiGetSleepTypeData: Failure to find \_Sx should not result in a loud warning [v2] >> >> Why don't you fix this in the invoker side? >> For example: >> If (acpi_get_handle()) >> acpi_evaluate_object() That seems like a sloppy workaround an actual bug in ACPICA. >> So that the AE_NOT_FOUND warning can still be kept for the real troubles? The code is warning 100% of the time on something that is optional. >> There are really scenarios that such warning is useful for catching bugs. >> What scenario is possible where this causes a problem? Issuing an error on something that is optional is not a good idea. P.