Re: acpi_wmi noisy without EC

On 2020-11-17 15:29, Yuri Pankov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2020, at 11:07 AM, Vladimir Kondratyev wrote:
>> On 2020-11-17 10:57, Vladimir Kondratyev wrote:
>> > On 2020-11-17 03:00, Yuri Pankov wrote:
>> >> I have started seeing the following on boot since some time:
>> >>
>> >> acpi_wmi0: <ACPI-WMI mapping> on acpi0
>> >> acpi_wmi0: cannot find EC device
>> >> device_attach: acpi_wmi0 attach returned 6
>> >> acpi_wmi0: <ACPI-WMI mapping> on acpi0
>> >> acpi_wmi0: cannot find EC device
>> >> device_attach: acpi_wmi0 attach returned 6
>> >> acpi_wmi0: <ACPI-WMI mapping> on acpi0
>> >> acpi_wmi0: cannot find EC device
>> >> device_attach: acpi_wmi0 attach returned 6
>> >> acpi_wmi0: <ACPI-WMI mapping> on acpi0
>> >> acpi_wmi0: cannot find EC device
>> >> device_attach: acpi_wmi0 attach returned 6
>> >>
>> >> Likely following this commit:
>> >>
>> >> commit 708d048ccfdacf6199cc08a56aa05a9c899441fd
>> >> Author: Vladimir Kondratyev <wulf_at_FreeBSD.org>
>> >> Date:   Sat Oct 31 22:19:39 2020 +0000
>> >>
>> >>     acpi_wmi(4): Add ACPI_PNP_INFO
>> >>
>> >> While the reason is obvious -- there's no EC in this system (Gigabyte
>> >> X299X AORUS MASTER desktop motherboard), at least searching the
>> >> `acpidump -dt` output doesn't show any PNP0C09 entries -- it certainly
>> >> looks like "something is broken" when first noticed.  I wonder if we
>> >> could/should handle this gracefully -- no EC, do nothing, simply exit?
>> >
>> > Following patch should ignore missing EC like Linux does. Could you
>> > test it?
>> >
>> > diff --git a/sys/dev/acpi_support/acpi_wmi.c
>> > b/sys/dev/acpi_support/acpi_wmi.c
>> > index 379cfd1705f1..efae96cdcc9a 100644
>> > --- a/sys/dev/acpi_support/acpi_wmi.c
>> > +++ b/sys/dev/acpi_support/acpi_wmi.c
>> > _at__at_ -246,7 +246,7 _at__at_ acpi_wmi_attach(device_t dev)
>> >  if ((sc->ec_dev = devclass_get_device(devclass_find("acpi_ec"), 0))
>> >      == NULL)
>> >  device_printf(dev, "cannot find EC device\n");
>> > - else if (ACPI_FAILURE((status =
>> > AcpiInstallNotifyHandler(sc->wmi_handle,
>> > + if (ACPI_FAILURE((status = AcpiInstallNotifyHandler(sc->wmi_handle,
>> >      ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY, acpi_wmi_notify_handler, sc))))
>> >  device_printf(sc->wmi_dev, "couldn't install notify handler - %s\n",
>> >      AcpiFormatException(status));
>> > _at__at_ -701,6 +701,8 _at__at_ acpi_wmi_ec_handler(UINT32 function,
>> > ACPI_PHYSICAL_ADDRESS address,
>> >  return (AE_BAD_PARAMETER);
>> >  if (address + (width / 8) - 1 > 0xFF)
>> >  return (AE_BAD_ADDRESS);
>> > + if (sc->ec_dev == NULL)
>> > + return (AE_NOT_FOUND);
>> >  if (function == ACPI_READ)
>> >  *value = 0;
>> >  ec_addr = address;
>> 
>> _at_#_at_##! Web client ate all the tabs.
>> 
>> Patch is in attachment.
> 
> Output changed, though it's still somewhat noisy -- I guess there
> isn't a way to NOT report the device that we are not going to attach
> to, or do that e.g. only for verbose boot?
> 
> acpi_wmi0: <ACPI-WMI mapping> on acpi0
> acpi_wmi0: cannot find EC device
> acpi_wmi0: Embedded MOF found
> ACPI: \134GSA1.WQCC: 1 arguments were passed to a non-method ACPI
> object (Buffer) (20201113/nsarguments-361)
> acpi_wmi1: <ACPI-WMI mapping> on acpi0
> acpi_wmi1: cannot find EC device
> acpi_wmi2: <ACPI-WMI mapping> on acpi0
> acpi_wmi2: cannot find EC device
> acpi_wmi3: <ACPI-WMI mapping> on acpi0
> acpi_wmi3: cannot find EC device

acpi_wmi does not try to attach to EC node (PNP0C09). It only queries it 
in OpRegion handler.
WMI's _HID/_CID is PNP0C14. According to your output, acpi_wmi has 
successfully attached to 4 nodes.

Verbosity can be reduced with attached patch if current level is too 
high for you.

-- 
WBR
Vladimir Kondratyev