Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 10:10:51 +0900 (JST) From: Mitsuru IWASAKI <iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org> To: jhb@FreeBSD.org Cc: sw@anthologeek.net, iwasaki@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, rwatson@FreeBSD.org, bright@mu.org, roberto@keltia.freenix.fr Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en/releases/5.0R todo.sgml Message-ID: <20021121.101051.131949999.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20021120121942.jhb@FreeBSD.org> References: <20021120160613.GA43304@anthologeek.net> <XFMail.20021120121942.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
> On 20-Nov-2002 Sameh Ghane wrote:
> > Le (On) Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 04:12:22PM +0100, Ollivier Robert ecrivit (wrote):
> >> According to Alfred Perlstein:
> >> > kernel: witness and invariants
> >> > userland: malloc
> >> >
> >> > any others?
> >>
> >> Working ACPI ? (although it may be too hard to do fro 5.0-R). Far too many
> >> machines have issues with ACPI :-(
> >
> > Maybe it's time to import a new snapshot.
> >
> > I was getting this error:
> > Nov 20 15:14:46 core kernel: acpi0: <GBT AWRDACPI> on motherboard
> > Nov 20 15:14:46 core kernel: ACPI-0467: *** Error: GPE0 block overlaps the GPE1
> > block
> > Nov 20 15:14:46 core kernel: acpi0: could not enable ACPI: AE_BAD_VALUE
> > Nov 20 15:14:46 core kernel: device_probe_and_attach: acpi0 attach returned 6
> >
> > and this small patch (from 20021101's snapshot) corrected this behavior:
> > --- evevent.c.old Wed Nov 20 15:49:34 2002
> > +++ evevent.c Wed Nov 20 15:53:34 2002
> > @@ -462,9 +462,13 @@
> > {
> > /* Check for GPE0/GPE1 overlap */
> >
> > - if (AcpiGbl_GpeNumberMax >= AcpiGbl_FADT->Gpe1Base)
> > + if ((AcpiGbl_GpeBlockInfo[0].RegisterCount) &&
> > + (AcpiGbl_GpeNumberMax >= AcpiGbl_FADT->Gpe1Base))
> > {
> > - ACPI_REPORT_ERROR (("GPE0 block overlaps the GPE1 block\n"));
> > + ACPI_REPORT_ERROR ((
> > + "GPE0 block (GPE 0 to %d) overlaps the GPE1 block (GPE %d to
> > %d)\n",
> > + AcpiGbl_GpeNumberMax, AcpiGbl_FADT->Gpe1Base,
> > + AcpiGbl_FADT->Gpe1Base + (ACPI_MUL_8
> > (AcpiGbl_GpeBlockInfo[1].RegisterCount) - 1)));
> > return_ACPI_STATUS (AE_BAD_VALUE);
> > }
>
> Yes, if that bug is fixed we should definitely upgrade to a newer import.
> Iwasaki-san, do you think you could do another import prior to RC1?
Yes, if I can. But I'm having a problem to get acpica-unix-20021118
from Intel site. I'll ask for Intel people soon...
Thanks
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021121.101051.131949999.iwasaki>