Hi, On Wednesday 19 December 2012 12:31:35 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > This is a well-aimed shot in the dark based on the DSDT I see. > > Can you post that DSDT by chance? The DSDT for a Lenovo Ideapad Y470 has been posted before to https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=42696. >From dsdt.dsl, line 9279 (context Device(\_SB.PCI0.PEG0)): Name (_ADR, 0x00010000) line 9377 (context Device(\_SB.PCI0.PEG0.PEGP)): Name (_ADR, 0xFFFF) line 9414 (context Device(\_SB.PCI0.PEG0.VGA)): Name (_ADR, Zero) >From ssdt6.dsl, line 1070, (context Device(\_SB.PCI0.PEG0.PEGP)): Method (_INI, 0, NotSerialized) { Store (Zero, \_SB.PCI0.PEG0.PEGP._ADR) } > > It is certainly > > not a solid proof that is won't break other machines and if it does break. > > As far as PCI is concerned, it only affects machines with multiple > > handles that have the same PCI address returned by _ADR. > > I wonder if there are any other criteria we can use to choose the "best" > handle in those cases? It doesn't look like choosing the first on or the > last one is really going to always work. Currently I do not have other ideas to get this to work, but Intel may have an ACPI expert who can help out here based on experience. Regards, Peter -- 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
