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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 4 Jul 2008 21:45:29 +0000
From:	"Justin Mattock" <>
To:	"Alexey Starikovskiy" <>
Cc:	"Matthew Garrett" <>,
	"Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu" <>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <>,
	"ACPI Devel Maling List" <>
Subject: Re: dsdt buggy acpi

On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 4:23 PM, Justin Mattock <> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 11:32 AM, Alexey Starikovskiy <> wrote:
>> Justin Mattock wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Matthew Garrett <>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 04:30:11PM +0000, Justin Mattock wrote:
>>>>> Hello; what info is supplied with EFI i.g. I'm using a macbook pro.
>>>>> After looking at:
>>>>> I was unable to locate
>>>>> anything with apple, or at least
>>>>> couldn't find the manufacture number.
>>>>> If somebody has already done this, I was wondering if it would be O.K.
>>>>> if I can attached my dsdt.dsl with the errors,
>>>>> and my explanation of what I changed, just so If I did something
>>>>> completely wrong
>>>> iasl will complain about code that the Linux interpreter will happily
>>>> accept. If the only reason you've made changes is that iasl complains,
>>>> then it's unlikely that there's any functional difference as a result.
>>>> Otherwise, work out which changes fix which Linux bugs and file a bug
>>>> at against acpi.
>>>> --
>>>> Matthew Garrett |
>>> Hello; I modified dsdt because iasl was complaining, As a result like
>>> what you said
>>> "then it's unlikely that there's any functional difference as a
>>> result" is probably
>>> what I'm seeing. As for a bug report I already have one filed. As to
>>> why I'm messing with
>>> the dsdt, just trying to isolate the problem with the bug I have
>>> already filed., or at least
>>> get a better idea of what is happening. Anyways thanks for the info.
>>> regards;
>> For difference, you should look for "Darwin", this is how MacOS X identifies
>> itself to hardware.
>> Regards,
>> Alex.
> Hello;
> So adding acpi_osi=Darwin will work for boot parameter. Also I wanted
> to apologize If I pissed you off,
> I didn't quite understand what was really happening, and now after
> looking into the scenario, I think I need to find out
> what is going on with my GPE's, this way you're detector(ec.c) won't
> be going off so frequently.
> regards;
> --
> Justin P. Mattock

Hmm I like this option(never new it existed), the only problem I'm seeing right
now is no battery info in /proc/acpi, "but there is no gpe storm which
makes me happy".
After searching I'm looking at the same as this:
Overall the outcome of using sbs is bad with the Darwin option, system
sticks after loading
the module during boot. even under different proceedures
i.g. with
sbs=only (no a/c and battery modules)


Justin P. Mattock
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists