Project

General

Profile

Actions

Bug #2002

closed

acpica upgrade to 20110211 (tentative)

Added by masterblaster about 13 years ago. Updated over 12 years ago.

Status:
Closed
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
-
Category:
-
Target version:
-
Start date:
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:

Description

Hi all,

the background: using dfly on an old laptop with not fully acpi compliant
chipset caused kernel panic, due to:

- double free in /sys/contrib/dev/acpica-unix/namespace/nspredef.c
- null pointer exception in AcpiReadBitRegister (fixed with commit
744f6957d487e57f1e5e6ed66c85a5601f48804f)

As the first problem has been already fixed in a later acpica release
(found in
http://git.moblin.org/cgit.cgi/acpica/commit/?id=235329a8f3056c9a7553e3a0a5ad43213384312b),
the only reasonable thing to me to do was an acpica release upgrade.

So i dared bringing in acpica 20110211:
https://github.com/randy1/DragonFlyBSD/commit/ea7ae20415c0af1882c4bcb40167443f4fae9d12

It's a big patch, but it's just a bring in of
acpica-unix-20110211.tar.gz with the least number of modifications to
compile.

It's still not usable anyway:
- absurd temp values reported (was the same in fbsd 6.3, seen in forums)
- on that laptop two GPEs cause an interrupt storm, slowing down the
system

Changes in /sys/dev/acpi are kept at a minimum to adapt to the new api
(btw simpler, but more fine grained), except new AcpiSetupGpeForWake(),
for what i followed fbsd 8.0 code

As i'm new to dfly, acpica, git(hub) i'm not sure if:
- i brought in all necessary stuff from tarball
- all things i brought in are really necessary
- my modifications in /sys/dev/acpi dir are meaningful at all

That's why i would be grateful if someone experienced could review the
patch and give feedback.

Further, patch unrelated feedback (coding style, git usage, ...) is
highly appreciated too.

Many thanks!

Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF