Re: [git pull request] ACPI and driver patches for 2.6.33.merge

Shaohua Li
2009-12-23T00:56:43Z

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 06:08:57PM +0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 09:28:50AM +0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>> Hi Linus,
> >>>>
> >>>> please pull from:
> >>>>
> >>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6.git release
> >>>>
> >>> ;..
> >>>> Shaohua Li (3):
> >>>> ? ? ?ACPI: Add a generic API for _OSC -v2
> >>>> ? ? ?ACPI: cleanup pci_root _OSC code.
> >>>> ? ? ?ACPI: Add platform-wide _OSC support.
> >>> it seems these three patches broke the _OSC on my intel new systems.
> >>>
> >>> revert them fix the problem with AER and pciehp and etc
> >> can you give more details? I just cleaned up the _OSC code for AER and
> >> pciehp, no function changes.
> >
> > Famous last words ;-)
> >
> > Yinghai, i suspect Shaohua needs the kind of info you'd need if you tried to
> > fix it: acpidump, before/after debug boot log, a description of what goes bad,
> > etc.
>
> the so called clean up, change the ret length checking.
>
> - if (!output.length)
> - return AE_NULL_OBJECT;
> -
>
> + /* return buffer should have the same length as cap buffer */
> + if (context->ret.length != context->cap.length)
> + return AE_NULL_OBJECT;
Wield BIOS. ACPI spec does mention the return buffer have the same length.
Does changing the check back make the issue go away?

Thanks,
Shaohua