On 02/01/2018, 09:46 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 01/29/2018, 01:56 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> 4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. >> >> ------------------ >> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> commit c2a6bbaf0c5f90463a7011a295bbdb7e33c80b51 upstream. >> >> The way acpi_find_child_device() works currently is that, if there >> are two (or more) devices with the same _ADR value in the same >> namespace scope (which is not specifically allowed by the spec and >> the OS behavior in that case is not defined), the first one of them >> found to be present (with the help of _STA) will be returned. >> >> This covers the majority of cases, but is not sufficient if some of >> the devices in question have a _HID (or _CID) returning some valid >> ACPI/PNP device IDs (which is disallowed by the spec) and the >> ASL writers' expectation appears to be that the OS will match >> devices without a valid ACPI/PNP device ID against a given bus >> address first. >> >> To cover this special case as well, modify find_child_checks() >> to prefer devices without ACPI/PNP device IDs over devices that >> have them. >> >> Suggested-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> >> Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@xxxxxxx> > > You seem you took this from SLE12-SP2? But where did you take the > upstream commit SHA from? In SLE, I have "Git-commit: fdad4e7a876a2..." > which is the correct SHA of this patch. The above c2a6bbaf0c is a > different patch. So are your scripts broken or is this a manual oversight? Not only the SHA, the whole commit message is taken from c2a6bbaf0c. But the diff below is fdad4e7a876a2. To clarify: upstream c2a6bbaf0c is in 4.4.80 already (as f4a42f8492). The diff below is a fix for it with upstream SHA fdad4e7a876a2 (in 4.4 as 1fe277d48f). So the code is correct, unlike meta data. >> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> --- >> drivers/acpi/glue.c | 12 ++++++------ >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> --- a/drivers/acpi/glue.c >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/glue.c >> @@ -99,13 +99,13 @@ static int find_child_checks(struct acpi >> return -ENODEV; >> >> /* >> - * If the device has a _HID (or _CID) returning a valid ACPI/PNP >> - * device ID, it is better to make it look less attractive here, so that >> - * the other device with the same _ADR value (that may not have a valid >> - * device ID) can be matched going forward. [This means a second spec >> - * violation in a row, so whatever we do here is best effort anyway.] >> + * If the device has a _HID returning a valid ACPI/PNP device ID, it is >> + * better to make it look less attractive here, so that the other device >> + * with the same _ADR value (that may not have a valid device ID) can be >> + * matched going forward. [This means a second spec violation in a row, >> + * so whatever we do here is best effort anyway.] >> */ >> - return sta_present && list_empty(&adev->pnp.ids) ? >> + return sta_present && !adev->pnp.type.platform_id ? >> FIND_CHILD_MAX_SCORE : FIND_CHILD_MIN_SCORE; >> } thanks, -- js suse labs