Re: acpi_wmi noisy without EC

On Tue, Nov 17, 2020, at 4:00 PM, Vladimir Kondratyev wrote:
> 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.

Oh great, I misunderstood then.  And indeed, sysctl -b dev.acpi_wmi.0.bmof | bmf2mof provides some interesting information.  All other 3 instances do not though.  In any case, it seems to work now.

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

Works for me both ways, I simply had the wrong impression that if we don't have EC, we can't attach at all.