From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 19 15:31:26 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27D771065675; Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:31:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) From: Jung-uk Kim To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:31:00 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <201010181333.29143.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <08905cd48f28787b5b3d36a4e75fb793@bluelife.at> In-Reply-To: <08905cd48f28787b5b3d36a4e75fb793@bluelife.at> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201010191131.16732.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: vbox@freebsd.org, Bernhard Froehlich Subject: Re: VirtualBox: Compile problems with ACPICA 20101013 X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:31:26 -0000 On Tuesday 19 October 2010 08:52 am, Bernhard Froehlich wrote: > On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:33:26 -0400, Jung-uk Kim > > wrote: > > On Monday 18 October 2010 05:44 am, Bernhard Froehlich wrote: > >> Hi guys! > >> > >> VirtualBox has a compile problem with latest acpica. I've talked > >> to the VirtualBox developers and they think it's an acpica > >> problem which should be fixed upstream. Can we somehow file a > >> bugreport or create a patch to fix that in acpica? > > > > Excerpt rom ACPI 4.0a: > > > > --------------------------------------------------- > > Each Compatible Device ID must be either: > > > > o A valid HID value (a 32-bit compressed EISA type ID or a string > > such as "ACPI0004"). > > o A string that uses a bus-specific nomenclature. For example, > > _CID can be used to specify the PCI ID. > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > Since it is not a valid HID value, you can only say it may be a > > bus-specific nomenclature at best. However, it looks like an ISA > > device to me and probably it is just a bogus ID. In fact, I > > googled a bit and it only exists on some Intel Mac models, it > > seems. You can just remove the entire _CID unless it is > > absolutely necessary, which is very unlikely. :-) > > It very much looks like a regression. Right beyond that sentences > they have a few examples in the ACPI 4.0a spec on page 201 that > won't pass that check. I haven't looked at all the code so probably > it's done somewhere completely different but if it is checked with > that code then it will complain. > > ACPI 4.0a spec on page 201: > --------------------------------------------------- > o A valid HID value (a 32-bit compressed EISA type ID or a string > such as "ACPI0004"). > o A string that uses a bus-specific nomenclature. For example, > _CID can be used to specify the PCI ID. > > "PCI\CC_ccss" > "PCI\CC_ccsspp" > "PCI\VEN_vvvv&DEV_dddd&SUBSYS_ssssssss&REV_rr" > .... > --------------------------------------------------- > > Now with a deeper look at the commit from acpica [1] especially the > second half. Before there was only an alphanumeric check for _HID > but with that change it was put into a new function AnCheckId() > that is called for both _HID and _CID and now wants both to be > alphanumeric. That looks correct for _HID but it's too strict for > _CID which is a string. Somewhere i've seen string is defined as a > null-terminated ASCII string and no word about alphanumeric. > > [1] > http://git.moblin.org/cgit.cgi/acpica/commit/?id=b66fd716e0b9b5389e Yes, I am aware of the issue. My point was _CID may be pointless for *VirtualBox* and it can be removed. Jung-uk Kim