Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Feb 2007 10:33:30 -0800
From:      "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>
To:        "Nate Lawson" <nate@root.org>, "John Baldwin" <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org, "Suietov, Fiodor F" <fiodor.f.suietov@intel.com>, Stephen Hurd <shurd@sasktel.net>, Alexey Starikovskiy <alexey.y.starikovskiy@linux.intel.com>, "Podrezov, Valery A" <valery.a.podrezov@intel.com>
Subject:   RE: HP LH3000r hangs on boot with ACPI enabled
Message-ID:  <B28E9812BAF6E2498B7EC5C427F293A401F472BA@orsmsx415.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <45DCEB12.2020107@root.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Good. As always, we are available for assistance as needed.
Thanks,
Bob


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nate Lawson [mailto:nate@root.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 5:00 PM
> To: John Baldwin
> Cc: Moore, Robert; Stephen Hurd; freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org; Alexey
> Starikovskiy; Brown, Len; Suietov, Fiodor F; Podrezov, Valery A
> Subject: Re: HP LH3000r hangs on boot with ACPI enabled
>=20
> John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Wednesday 21 February 2007 16:47, Moore, Robert wrote:
> >> Nate,
> >>
> >> We have tried to keep ACPICA as OS-independent as possible. In the
case
> >> of spinlocks, you can easily implement the interfaces with whatever
is
> >> appropriate (or available) for your OS.
> >>
> >> We felt that we needed to split the mutex interfaces into
> >> mutex/spinlocks for those hosts that have these different types of
> >> synchronization mechanisms.
> >>
> >> Certainly, I would suggest that you keep up-to-date with the latest
> >> ACPICA as we continue to develop and debug the code.
> >
> > Since the ACPI interrupt is run in an ithread, you can probably just
> > ignore the IRQL stuff as garbage and use a regular mutex Nate.
Also,
> > this bug report was from 6.2, so it was actually from an older
version
> > of ACPICA.  Can't recall what is holding up the MFC of 20051021 to
6.x.
>=20
> Yes, I'm hoping we can do that.  Jung-uk Kim is preparing a patch of
> 20070126 so hopefully we can test and integrate that.
>=20
> We didn't MFC 20051021 due to a memory leak on some systems (bad
> refcount).  That was fixed a few revisions later, but I remember a few
> 2006 versions having other problems (hanging on boot) and then I ran
out
> of time to review/debug the patches.
>=20
> Hopefully 20070126 is good and we can commit it quickly, then MFC
after
> a month.
>=20
> --
> Nate



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?B28E9812BAF6E2498B7EC5C427F293A401F472BA>