* Andrew Patterson <andrew.patterson@xxxxxx>: > On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 14:57 +0900, Kenji Kaneshige wrote: > > + /* Need to ignore the bit0 in result code */ > > + errors = *((u32 *)out_obj->buffer.pointer) & ~(1 << 0); > > + if (errors) { > > + if (errors & OSC_REQUEST_ERROR) > > + printk(KERN_DEBUG "_OSC request fails\n"); > > + if (errors & OSC_INVALID_UUID_ERROR) > > + printk(KERN_DEBUG "_OSC invalid UUID\n"); > > + if (errors & OSC_INVALID_REVISION_ERROR) > > + printk(KERN_DEBUG "_OSC invalid revision\n"); > > + if (errors & OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR) { > > + if (capbuf[OSC_QUERY_TYPE] & OSC_QUERY_ENABLE) > > + goto out_success; > > + printk(KERN_DEBUG "_OSC FW not grant req. control\n"); > > Can this be worded better? Perhaps "Firmware would not grant requested > _OSC control"? I know this is not your code, but maybe we can fix this > now. Trying not to bike shed, but if you're going to change the wording, I'd prefer to see "Firmware did not..." vs "Firmware would not..." Thanks. /ac -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html