On Sun, 2007-12-09 at 23:04 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 04:12:25PM -0500, Elvis Pranskevichus wrote: > > Jean Delvare wrote: > > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 21:22:34 -0500, Mike Houston wrote: > > >> On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 01:05:54 +0100 > > >> Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> > > >> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 09:51:54PM -0500, Mike Houston wrote: > > >> > > I finally got around to testing Linux 2.6.24 (2.6.24-rc4) and > > >> > > found that the it87 driver fails to probe and consequently, my > > >> > > sensors no longer work. This was fine with Linux 2.6.23.8 (the > > >> > > last kernel I was using) > > >> > > > > >> > > The necessary modules load, but: > > >> > > > > >> > > it87: Found IT8718F chip at 0x290, revision 2 > > >> > > it87: in3 is VCC (+5V) > > >> > > it87 it87.656: Failed to request region 0x290-0x297 > > >> > > it87: probe of it87.656 failed with error -16 > > >> > > > > >> > > Coretemp still works. > > >> > > > > >> > > It appears it has something to do with the ioport range being > > >> > > reserved for some reason: > > >> > > > > >> > > system 00:01: ioport range 0x290-0x29f has been reserved > > >> > > >> > > > >> > Thanks for your report. > > >> > > > >> > Please also provide: > > >> > - dmesg from 2.6.23.8 > > >> > - The output of "cat /proc/ioports" for both kernels > > >> > > >> Thanks Adrian, here is the information you have requested, for > > >> both kernels (I have 2.6.23.9 now though where it87 still works) > > >> > > >> Linux 2.6.23.9: > > >> http://www.mikeserv.com/temp/proc_ioports-2.6.23.9.txt > > >> http://www.mikeserv.com/temp/dmesg-2.6.23.9.txt > > >> http://www.mikeserv.com/temp/config-2.6.23.9.txt > > >> > > >> Linux 2.6.24-rc4: > > >> http://www.mikeserv.com/temp/proc_ioports-2.6.24-rc4.txt > > >> http://www.mikeserv.com/temp/dmesg-2.6.24-rc4.txt > > > > > > This one shows: > > > > > > system 00:01: ioport range 0x290-0x29f has been reserved > > > (...) > > > system 00:01: ioport range 0x290-0x294 has been reserved > > > > > > This is clearly not correct as both areas overlap. The second > > > reservation is responsible for the it87 breakage, because it conflicts > > > with what the it87 driver later attempts to request (0x290-0x297). The > > > first is wrong as well (the IT87xxF environment controller I/O area is > > > 8 port wide, not 16) but shouldn't be a problem in practice. > > > > > > These port reservations weren't happening in 2.6.23.9 according to your > > > dmesg output for that kernel. I don't know what changed in this area > > > since 2.6.23.9, maybe Bjorn or Adam (Cc'd) can tell. > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I have exactly the same problem here on a Gigabyte GA-965G-DS3 motherboard > > based box: > > > > it87: Found IT8718F chip at 0x290, revision 1 > > it87: in3 is VCC (+5V) > > it87 it87.656: Failed to request region 0x290-0x297 > > it87: probe of it87.656 failed with error -16 > > > > git bisecting revealed the offending commit: > > > > a7839e960675b54: PNP: increase the maximum number of resources > > > > Happened between rc3 and rc4. > > Thanks for doing the work of bisecting! > > > > Either way, the overlapping areas smell like a BIOS bug, meaning that > > > you should look for an updated BIOS for your system first. > > > > > >> http://www.mikeserv.com/temp/config-2.6.24-rc4.txt > > > > > > > This indeed looks like a broken ACPI BIOS since the aforementioned commit > > touches only the PNP ACPI driver. I'm not sure how to work around this, > > though. Ideas? > > People responsible for this commit + ACPI maintainer added to Cc. This should exist in previous kernel (before we remove acpi motherboard driver) too. Basically it's a broken BIOS. Could below patch work around it? Thanks, Shaohua Index: linux/drivers/pnp/system.c =================================================================== --- linux.orig/drivers/pnp/system.c 2007-12-10 10:17:46.000000000 +0800 +++ linux/drivers/pnp/system.c 2007-12-10 10:24:42.000000000 +0800 @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ static const struct pnp_device_id pnp_de {"", 0} }; -static void reserve_range(struct pnp_dev *dev, resource_size_t start, +static struct resource* reserve_range(struct pnp_dev *dev, resource_size_t start, resource_size_t end, int port) { char *regionid; @@ -31,16 +31,14 @@ static void reserve_range(struct pnp_dev regionid = kmalloc(16, GFP_KERNEL); if (!regionid) - return; + return NULL; snprintf(regionid, 16, "pnp %s", pnpid); if (port) res = request_region(start, end - start + 1, regionid); else res = request_mem_region(start, end - start + 1, regionid); - if (res) - res->flags &= ~IORESOURCE_BUSY; - else + if (!res) kfree(regionid); /* @@ -52,12 +50,17 @@ static void reserve_range(struct pnp_dev port ? "ioport" : "iomem", (unsigned long long) start, (unsigned long long) end, res ? "has been" : "could not be"); + return res; } static void reserve_resources_of_dev(struct pnp_dev *dev) { int i; + struct resource **res; + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource *) * PNP_MAX_PORT, GFP_KERNEL); + if (!res) + return; for (i = 0; i < PNP_MAX_PORT; i++) { if (!pnp_port_valid(dev, i)) continue; @@ -76,17 +79,28 @@ static void reserve_resources_of_dev(str if (pnp_port_end(dev, i) < pnp_port_start(dev, i)) continue; /* invalid */ - reserve_range(dev, pnp_port_start(dev, i), + res[i] = reserve_range(dev, pnp_port_start(dev, i), pnp_port_end(dev, i), 1); } + for (i = 0; i < PNP_MAX_PORT; i++) + if (res[i]) + res[i]->flags &= ~IORESOURCE_BUSY; + kfree(res); + res = kzalloc(sizeof(struct resource *) * PNP_MAX_MEM, GFP_KERNEL); + if (!res) + return; for (i = 0; i < PNP_MAX_MEM; i++) { if (!pnp_mem_valid(dev, i)) continue; - reserve_range(dev, pnp_mem_start(dev, i), + res[i] = reserve_range(dev, pnp_mem_start(dev, i), pnp_mem_end(dev, i), 0); } + for (i = 0; i < PNP_MAX_MEM; i++) + if (res[i]) + res[i]->flags &= ~IORESOURCE_BUSY; + kfree(res); } static int system_pnp_probe(struct pnp_dev *dev, - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
