From: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx> The message "ACPI: Device needs an ACPI driver" is misleading. The device _may_ need an ACPI driver, if the BIOS implemented a custom API for the device in question (which, AFAIK, can't be checked.) If not, then either a generic ACPI driver may be used (for example "thermal"), or nothing can be done (other than a white list). I propose to reword the message to: ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available for this device, you should use it instead of the native driver which I think is more correct. Comments and suggestions welcome. I also added a message warning about possible problems and system instability when users pass acpi_enforce_resources=lax, as suggested by Len. Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx> Cc: Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx> Cc: Alan Jenkins <sourcejedi.lkml@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/acpi/osl.c | 8 +++++++- 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c index 5633b86..7c1c59e 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c @@ -1161,7 +1161,13 @@ int acpi_check_resource_conflict(struct resource *res) res_list_elem->name, (long long) res_list_elem->start, (long long) res_list_elem->end); - printk(KERN_INFO "ACPI: Device needs an ACPI driver\n"); + if (acpi_enforce_resources == ENFORCE_RESOURCES_LAX) + printk(KERN_NOTICE "ACPI: This conflict may" + " cause random problems and system" + " instability\n"); + printk(KERN_INFO "ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available" + " for this device, you should use it instead of" + " the native driver\n"); } if (acpi_enforce_resources == ENFORCE_RESOURCES_STRICT) return -EBUSY; -- 1.6.0.6 -- 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
