On Wednesday, October 14, 2015 02:20:51 PM Al Stone wrote: > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > --------------020400080004050109020606 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > On 10/12/2015 10:06 PM, Pat Erley wrote: > > On 10/12/2015 01:52 PM, Al Stone wrote: > >> On 10/11/2015 09:58 PM, Pat Erley wrote: > >>> On 10/11/2015 08:49 PM, Hanjun Guo wrote: > >>>> On 10/12/2015 11:08 AM, Pat Erley wrote: > >>>>> On 10/05/2015 10:12 AM, Al Stone wrote: > >>>>>> On 10/05/2015 07:39 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 30, 2015 10:10:16 AM Al Stone wrote: > >>>>>>>> On 09/30/2015 03:00 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On 2015/9/30 7:45, Al Stone wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> NB: this patch set is for use against the linux-pm bleeding edge > >>>>>>>>>> branch. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> [snip...] > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> For this patch set, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>>>>> Hanjun > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks, Hanjun! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Series applied, thanks! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Rafael > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, Rafael! > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Just decided to test out linux-next (to see the new nouveau cleanups). > >>>>> This change set prevents my Lenovo W510 from booting properly. > >>>>> > >>>>> Reverting: 7494b0 "ACPI: add in a bad_madt_entry() function to > >>>>> eventually replace the macro" > >>>>> > >>>>> Gets the system booting again. I'm attaching my dmesg from the failed > >>>>> boot, who wants the acpidump? > >>>> > >>>> [ 0.000000] ACPI: undefined version for either FADT 4.0 or MADT 1 > >>>> [ 0.000000] ACPI: Error parsing LAPIC address override entry > >>>> [ 0.000000] ACPI: Invalid BIOS MADT, disabling ACPI > >>>> > >>>> Seems the MADT revision is not right, could you dump the ACPI MADT > >>>> (APIC) table and send it out? I will take a look :) > >>>> > >>>> Thanks > >>>> Hanjun > >>> > >>> Here ya go, enjoy. Feel free to CC me on any patches that might fix it. > >> > >> Pat, > >> > >> Would you mind sending a copy of the FADT, also, please? The first of the > >> ACPI messages is a check of version correspondence between the FADT and MADT, > >> while the second message is from looking at just an MADT subtable. Thanks > >> for sending the MADT out -- that helps me quite a lot in thinking this through. > >> > >> BTW, whoever is providing the BIOS (Lenovo, I assume) may want to have a look > >> at these, also: > >> > >> [ 0.000000] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): 32/64X length mismatch in > >> FADT/Pm1aControlBlock: 16/32 (20150818/tbfadt-623) > >> [ 0.000000] ACPI BIOS Warning (bug): Invalid length for > >> FADT/Pm1aControlBlock: 32, using default 16 (20150818/tbfadt-704) > >> > >> Not inherently dangerous, but definitely sloppy and mind-numbingly easy to > >> avoid, IIRC. > >> > > > > Here ya go. > > Okay. There's just a lot of weird stuff out there in ACPI-land. I've > attached four minor fixes for the special cases that have been reported > (well, the last one is actually a fix for a typo in the spec, but just > the same...). > > These should apply on top of linux-next; would you mind trying them out > to make sure I didn't break anything else on your laptop? If they behave > as I hope they will, I think I'll have covered all the places where the > checking of MADT subtables needs to be be relaxed a bit. These work for > me on arm64, but if they work for you and a couple of other testers, then > I'll send them to Rafael properly. Well, you might as well submit them properly right away, so I could pick them up and put them into my linux-next branch, which then might make it easier for some people to test them. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|