> On 26 May 2015, at 00:39, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Pierre Moreau <pierre.morrow@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Most _DSM will return an integer value of 0x80000002 when given an unknown
>> UUID, revision ID or function ID. Checking locally allows us to differentiate
>> that case from other ACPI errors, and to not report a "failed to evaluate _DSM"
>> if 0x80000002 is returned which was confusing.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pierre Moreau <pierre.morrow@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c b/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
>> index 073f7d7..7aeaf7d 100644
>> --- a/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
>> +++ b/drm/nouveau/nouveau_acpi.c
>> @@ -88,12 +88,12 @@ static int nouveau_evaluate_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, u
>> for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
>> args_buff[i] = (arg >> i * 8) & 0xFF;
>>
>> - obj = acpi_evaluate_dsm_typed(handle, nouveau_op_dsm_muid, nouveau_op_dsm_rid,
>> - func, &argv4, ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER);
>> + obj = acpi_evaluate_dsm(handle, nouveau_op_dsm_muid, nouveau_op_dsm_rid,
>> + func, &argv4);
>> if (!obj) {
>> acpi_handle_info(handle, "failed to evaluate _DSM\n");
>> return AE_ERROR;
>> - } else {
>> + } else if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER) {
>> if (!result && obj->buffer.length == 4) {
>> *result = obj->buffer.pointer[0];
>> *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[1] << 8);
>> @@ -101,6 +101,15 @@ static int nouveau_evaluate_optimus_dsm(acpi_handle handle, int func, int arg, u
>> *result |= (obj->buffer.pointer[3] << 24);
>> }
>> ACPI_FREE(obj);
>> + } else if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER &&
>> + obj->integer.value == 0x80000002) {
>> + acpi_handle_debug(handle, "failed to query Optimus _DSM\n");
>> + ACPI_FREE(obj);
>> + return -ENODEV;
>
> should this be AE_ERROR?
I would say no, because ACPI was parsed correctly, just that we didn't it give the correct arguments, or rather, the _DSM we tested isn't an Optimus one, but it could a mux or gmux. And I used ENODEV as it is the value returned by nouveau_evaluate_mux_dsm in the same context.
>
>> + } else {
>> + acpi_handle_err(handle, "unexpected returned value by Optimus _DSM\n");
>> + ACPI_FREE(obj);
>> + return AE_ERROR;
>> }
>>
>> return 0;
>> --
>> 2.4.1
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nouveau mailing list
>> Nouveau@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
