On Wednesday 28 April 2010 07:42:34 pm Lin Ming wrote:
> From: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [PATCH] acpi: fix early DSDT dmi check warnings on ia64
>
> Tony Luck saw a lot of warning messages on ia64:
> WARNING: at drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c:423 dmi_matches+0x70/0x160()
> dmi check: not initialized yet.
>
> This is caused by commit aa2110c(ACPI: add boot option acpi=copy_dsdt to fix corrupt DSDT).
> DMI is not initialized yet in acpi_early_init.
> This patch checks the availability of DMI to avoid the warnings.
>
> Tested-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/bus.c | 4 +++-
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> index 49af19b..047de07 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> @@ -847,8 +847,10 @@ void __init acpi_early_init(void)
> /*
> * If the machine falls into the DMI check table,
> * DSDT will be copied to memory
> + * Only check x86, it's too early to check dmi for ia64
I can't remember why this is different between x86 and ia64. If
it's reasonable to do, I think it'd be nicer to make DMI available
earlier on ia64 so we don't have to add checks like this. Did you
investigate that?
Bjorn
> */
> - dmi_check_system(dsdt_dmi_table);
> + if (dmi_available)
> + dmi_check_system(dsdt_dmi_table);
>
> status = acpi_reallocate_root_table();
> if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>
>
> --
> 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
>
--
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
