linux-kernel - Re: one more ACPI Error (utglobal-0125): Unknown exception code:0xFFFFFFEA [Re: 2.6.18-rc4-mm3]

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 12 Sep 2006 18:27:39 -0700
From:	keith mannthey <kmannth@...ibm.com>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
Cc:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@...el.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Mattia Dongili <malattia@...ux.it>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux acpi <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: one more ACPI Error (utglobal-0125): Unknown exception 
	code:0xFFFFFFEA [Re: 2.6.18-rc4-mm3]

On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 20:27 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-09-07 at 09:25 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> If we decide that "try HID first, then try CID" is the right thing,
> >> I think we should figure out how to make that work.  Maybe that
> >> means extending the driver model somehow.
> > Don't think it's easy, especially no other bus needs it I guess.
> 
> I agree it's probably not easy, but I think having the right
> semantics is more important than fitting cleanly into the
> driver model.  But I know that without code, I'm just venting
> hot air, not contributing to a solution.
> 
> How's the ACPI driver model integration going, anyway?  I seem
> to recall some patches a while back, but I don't think they're
> in the tree yet.
> 
> > Do we really need the memory hotplug device returns pnp0c01/pnp0c02?
> > What's the purpose?
> 
> I don't know.  But I think Keith already determined that a BIOS change
> is not likely.  I hate to ask for BIOS changes like this because it
> feels like asking them to avoid broken things in Linux.

  Ok my motherboard patch was dropped from -mm so I am broken again but
others are fixed. Is the answer that we do nothing about this issues?   

  I am pretty sure my SSDT table is valid if someone *cannot* point out
in the spec where my device is malformed  by having both HID and CID I
will not be able even start the request to change the BIOS (it would be
a waste of my time).  Sure having the CID of the memory device may be
overkill but is it wrong?  

  Unless someone can show me a alternate solution I am going to push the
check HID before CID patch to -mm in the next day or two. 

Thanks,
  Keith 



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/