Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 12:25:37 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>, freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: MacBookPro 5,1 Message-ID: <201011031225.46128.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201011030828.03108.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201010121209.06397.hselasky@c2i.net> <201011021832.22710.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <201011030828.03108.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 03 November 2010 08:28 am, John Baldwin wrote: > On Tuesday, November 02, 2010 6:32:12 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > On Tuesday 02 November 2010 05:26 pm, John Baldwin wrote: > > > On Tuesday, November 02, 2010 4:50:18 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > > > On Tuesday 02 November 2010 04:24 pm, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday, November 02, 2010 4:14:05 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > > > > > On Tuesday 02 November 2010 03:41 pm, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 02, 2010 3:29:01 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tuesday 02 November 2010 11:29 am, Andriy Gapon wrote: > > > > > > > > > on 29/10/2010 08:51 Andriy Gapon said the following: > > > > > > > > > > I guess that a general problem here is that it is > > > > > > > > > > incorrect to merely use memcpy/bcopy to create a > > > > > > > > > > copy of a resource if the resource has > > > > > > > > > > ACPI_RESOURCE_SOURCE field in it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hans, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > could you please test the following patch? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/sys/dev/acpica/acpi_pci_link.c > > > > > > > > > b/sys/dev/acpica/acpi_pci_link.c index > > > > > > > > > dcf101d..e842635 100644 --- > > > > > > > > > a/sys/dev/acpica/acpi_pci_link.c +++ > > > > > > > > > b/sys/dev/acpica/acpi_pci_link.c > > > > > > > > > @@ -767,6 +767,8 @@ acpi_pci_link_srs_from_crs > > > > > > > > > link->l_irq; > > > > > > > > > else > > > > > > > > > resptr->Data.ExtendedIrq.Interrupts[0] = 0; > > > > > > > > > + memset(&resptr->Data.ExtendedIrq.ResourceSource > > > > > > > > >, 0, + sizeof(ACPI_RESOURCE_SOURCE)); > > > > > > > > > link++; > > > > > > > > > i++; > > > > > > > > > break; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm... Very interesting. Can you please try this, > > > > > > > > too? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Linux doesn't set the resource source bits up at all > > > > > > > when doing _SRS, so I'd rather just do that. I think > > > > > > > what I'd prefer is that we not use the prs_template, > > > > > > > perhaps just save the type of the resource and build a > > > > > > > new resource object from scratch where the resource is > > > > > > > zero'd, the appropriate bits are set and then that > > > > > > > resource is appended to the buffer being built. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Linux doesn't do it" is wrong if I am reading the spec. > > > > > > correctly, i.e., _CRS, _PRS and _SRS must have the same > > > > > > format and size. > > > > > > > > > > Umm, but we aren't setting up the raw bits for _SRS. We > > > > > are creating a list of ACPI_RESOURCE objects that ACPICA > > > > > then encodes into a buffer to send to _SRS. > > > > > > > > Yes, I understand. However, ACPICA is expecting the same > > > > size of buffer *including* the optional parts if I am reading > > > > the code right. Besides, I don't think there is any harm in > > > > doing the right thing. ;-) > > > > > > To be clear, I am suggesting to take an ACPI_RESOURCE object, > > > bzero it, then set the type and the IRQ and that's it. Leave > > > the ResourceSource bits as zero. The size will still be set > > > based on the actual type (or if needed we can use the cached > > > size from the template copy we save from _PRS). The point > > > would be to start from a zero structure instead of from a copy > > > of what we got from _PRS. > > > > It may work if we don't use l_prs_template. > > Well, we still need much of the info from the _PRS resource (the > type, etc.), but I think we should not blindly use the template > directly when building the buffer for _SRS. Actually, I think we should get the information directly from _CRS as ACPI spec. is suggesting. Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201011031225.46128.jkim>