On Friday 07 January 2005 01:38 pm, Nate Lawson wrote: > Pawel Worach wrote: > > Nate Lawson wrote: > >> Pawel Worach wrote: > >>> I do not even see the code enter acpi_pci_link_attach(), even added a > >>> dummy > >>> printf at the top of the method. > >> > >> That's a problem. If the link isn't attached, you can't route > >> interrupts by it. Try adding this to the if statemetns in > >> sys/dev/acpica/acpi.c:acpi_probe_order() -- > >> > >> /* attach pci links early */ > >> } else if (acpi_MatchHid(handle, "PNP0C0F")) { > >> *order = 3; > >> ret = 1; > >> } > > > > acpi_probe_order() is called 26 times but PNP0C0F never seems to match > > the handle passed to it. > > Oh, I think I know where I didn't understand John. He doesn't probe > links through the normal namespace probe, he goes through _PRT, > dereferencing Source and probing those directly. Since your PCI bus > appears in the namespace before the links, the above does not get called > before the crash. It's been a rough week, hence I'm more dense. :) > > A separate problem with this, John, is that you get a different _PRT > based on whether in APIC mode or not. So a link that is only referenced > in PIC mode _PRT, for instance, will never be disabled on an APIC > machine (since we enable APIC before PCI routing.) We'd never see it if > only probing links through _PRT. I think it would be better to attach > them through normal namespace methods and use the probe_order hack > above. The only thing it could potentially interfere with is > sysresource, but since IRQ resources come from nexus above and are not > defined in memory/IO port sysresource objects, there should be no actual > conflict. Err, I just use the _PRT walk to force the device_t to attach if it doesn't already. The device will always attach though, even it's not referenced, it just does so in the regular new-bus order, so all links are probed, and ones that aren't referenced by any _PRT's that we parse do get disabled via _DIS. > The ASL patch John just sent should fix your issue. My question if this > works is why it just started occuring and also, what the proper handle > to use is for relative references (i.e., why didn't AcpiGetHandle(ROOT, > "LPUS") work since \LPUS is right under the root?) Yes, this is a good question, and I'm not sure my ASL patch will fix his problem. I wonder if he is getting back a NULL ACPI_HANDLE? -- John Baldwin <jhb_at_FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.orgReceived on Fri Jan 07 2005 - 18:51:30 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:25 UTC