[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1389239259.24105.2.camel@linux-s257.site>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 11:47:39 +0800
From: joeyli <jlee@...e.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>,
Matthew Garrett <matthew.garrett@...ula.com>, Elliott@...com,
samer.el-haj-mahmoud@...com, Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.de>,
werner@...e.com, trenn@...e.de, JBeulich@...e.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rtc-linux@...glegroups.com,
x86@...nel.org,
"linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 04/14] ACPI: Add ACPI 5.0 Time and Alarm Device
driver
於 三,2014-01-08 於 09:56 -0800,H. Peter Anvin 提到:
[...]
> > Document of Windows XP:
> >
> http://www.freelists.org/post/windows_errors/what-error-messages-really-mean-WinXP-IO-Ports-Blocked-from-Bios-AML-on-Windows-XP
> >
> > If just for ACPI TAD testing, we can remove the port protection
> check of
> > RTC ports in hwvalid.c. I have read 0x70/0x71 port success after
> removed
> > the checking in acpica/hwvalid.c.
> >
> > I will try to write RTC port in AML after remove acpica check, maybe
> > have other unpredictable situation.
> >
>
> Now *THERE* is a good use of the "no RTC bit". In the case that bit
> is
> set we should presumably remove these ports from the block list.
Thanks for your suggestion, I will put a testing patch on this.
>
> Otherwise we should use the CMOS address space, not the I/O port
> address
> space.
>
> -hpa
Unfortunately current acpica leaks the SystemCMOS handler:
ACPI Error: Region SystemCMOS (ID=5) has no handler (20131115/exfldio-299)
Regards
Joey Lee
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists