Re: one more ACPI Error (utglobal-0125): Unknown exception code: 0xFFFFFFEA [Re: 2.6.18-rc4-mm3]

[keith mannthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>]

On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 17:20 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Friday 01 September 2006 17:01, keith mannthey wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-08-31 at 21:15 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > The current ACPI driver binding algorithm in acpi_bus_find_driver()
> > > looks at each driver, checking whether it can match either the _HID
> > > or the _CID of a device.  Since we try the motherboard driver first,
> > > it matches the memory device _CID.
> > 
> > Ok I reverted the motherboard driver patch and cooked up the following
> > patch that works for my issue.  
> > 
> >   It creates the idea that acpi_match_ids has a type of request to check
> > against for _HID, _CID or both.  See acpi_bus_match_req. I then fix up
> > all the needed callers to change the API to acpi_match_ids and
> > acpi_bus_match and have callers can say what they want to match
> > against. 
> >   
> >   Then in acpi_bus_find_driver I have it do 2 passes to search for _HID
> > first then the _CID.  
> > 
> > Does this look like it is in the right ballpark or should we be doing
> > something else?  Built/tested against 2.6.18-rc4-mm3. 
> 
> Conceptually I like this much better than mucking with the motherboard
> driver.  I'm not sure the important people have signed off on this
> strategy of binding with _HID first, then _CID (hi, Len :-))  Maybe
> there are ramifications that we need to consider.  But I think it
> is a better match for "what people expect should happen."

ACPI folks can we get some response to this?  This problem has been
reported a few times against the -mm tree and I would like to get the
proper fix (whatever it is) upstream sometime soon. 

Bjorn thanks for the help and for pointing the error reports in the
right direction. 

Thanks,
  Keith