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

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

On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 20:27 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 09:25 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> If we decide that "try HID first, then try CID" is the right thing,
> >> I think we should figure out how to make that work.  Maybe that
> >> means extending the driver model somehow.
> > Don't think it's easy, especially no other bus needs it I guess.
> 
> I agree it's probably not easy, but I think having the right
> semantics is more important than fitting cleanly into the
> driver model.  But I know that without code, I'm just venting
> hot air, not contributing to a solution.
> 
> How's the ACPI driver model integration going, anyway?  I seem
> to recall some patches a while back, but I don't think they're
> in the tree yet.
> 
> > Do we really need the memory hotplug device returns pnp0c01/pnp0c02?
> > What's the purpose?
> 
> I don't know.  But I think Keith already determined that a BIOS change
> is not likely.  I hate to ask for BIOS changes like this because it
> feels like asking them to avoid broken things in Linux.

  Ok my motherboard patch was dropped from -mm so I am broken again but
others are fixed. Is the answer that we do nothing about this issues?   

  I am pretty sure my SSDT table is valid if someone *cannot* point out
in the spec where my device is malformed  by having both HID and CID I
will not be able even start the request to change the BIOS (it would be
a waste of my time).  Sure having the CID of the memory device may be
overkill but is it wrong?  

  Unless someone can show me a alternate solution I am going to push the
check HID before CID patch to -mm in the next day or two. 

Thanks,
  Keith