Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 10:50:42 -0500 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: src-committers@FreeBSD.org Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r184558 - head/sys/dev/acpica/Osd Message-ID: <200811031050.48765.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200811021250.mA2CoGs1038957@svn.freebsd.org> References: <200811021250.mA2CoGs1038957@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sunday 02 November 2008 07:50 am, Alexander Motin wrote: > Author: mav > Date: Sun Nov 2 12:50:16 2008 > New Revision: 184558 > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/184558 > > Log: > As soon as we have several threads per process now, it is not > correct to use process ID as ACPI thread ID. Concurrent requests > with equal thread IDs broke ACPI mutexes operation causing > unpredictable errors including AE_AML_MUTEX_NOT_ACQUIRED that I > have seen. > > Use kernel thread ID instead of process ID for ACPI thread. Sorry but this patch is incorrect, i.e., td_tid is not unique. You have to use curthread or (p_pid, td_tid) pair. Unfortunately, even if you correct this problem, you also have to correct ACPI_THREAD_ID definition, which is in the vendor code. That's why it wasn't done yet and it is more complicated than you think, i.e., ACPI-CA assumes sizeof(ACPI_THREAD_ID) == sizeof(int), etc. Please see the related ACPI-CA bugs: http://www.acpica.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=719 http://www.acpica.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=732 In fact, I have been maintaining patchsets with the fix here: http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/acpica-import-<ACPI_RELEASE>.diff.gz Please revert this commit until we resolve these issues with the vendor first. Thanks! Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200811031050.48765.jkim>