From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 29 22:39:03 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55B5E16A420 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:39:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from speedfactory.net (mail6.speedfactory.net [66.23.216.219]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD2F243D6A for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:39:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (unverified [66.23.211.162]) by speedfactory.net (SurgeMail 3.5b3) with ESMTP id 2831643 for multiple; Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:38:32 -0500 Received: from localhost (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id jATMcn7u075262; Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:38:49 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: "Moore, Robert" Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:38:59 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <971FCB6690CD0E4898387DBF7552B90E03907B15@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <971FCB6690CD0E4898387DBF7552B90E03907B15@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200511291739.00985.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on server.baldwin.cx X-Server: High Performance Mail Server - http://surgemail.com r=1653887525 Cc: David Kelly , freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Worked in RELENG_5, fails in RELENG_6 X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:39:03 -0000 On Tuesday 29 November 2005 05:26 pm, Moore, Robert wrote: > FACS does not replace FADT. FACS is an ACPI 1.0 table as well. Ok, nevermind then, I misread things in the brief browsing I did of CHANGES.txt in the ACPICA distribution. Do you have any ideas why an older version of ACPICA would accept his FACS, but the more recent versions are now choking on it? Did the in-kernel version not verify checksums on FACS until recently? It seems that acpidump has always reported that the table is corrupt, even with the older ACPICA distribution. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- > > acpi@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of John Baldwin > > Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 1:47 PM > > To: David Kelly > > Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org > > Subject: Re: Worked in RELENG_5, fails in RELENG_6 > > > > On Tuesday 29 November 2005 04:19 pm, David Kelly wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:52:34PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > > > > On Monday 28 November 2005 10:46 pm, David Kelly wrote: > > > > > Downloaded and FLASHed BIOS from A06 to Dell's latest, A09 this > > > > > evening. No improvement. Also built and installed a new kernel > > from > > > > > > cvsup this afternoon. No improvement. > > > > > > > > But 5.4 works fine with ACPI enabled? This is the machine that > > even > > > > > acpidump chokes on, yes? Does acpidump work ok on 5.4? > > > > > > "acpidump -t -d" stops after 31 lines and says, "acpidump: FACS is > > > corrupt" on stderr. See > > > http://home.hiwaay.net/~dkelly/opus-acpidump-d-t.txt > > > > > > "acpidump -d" runs without error and emits 2754 lines. See > > > http://home.hiwaay.net/~dkelly/opus-acpidump-d.txt > > > > > > ACPI worked with 5.4 so I never had a reason to acpidump then. Could > > I > > > > boot a 5.4 CDROM to test ACPI? Without much effort have put my hands > > on > > > > a "5.3-RELEASE Live Filesystem" CDROM that should make a good test. > > > > > > There was an issue briefly with ACPI in 5.0 or 5.1, very likely in a > > > prerelease. > > > > > > Absolultely certain ACPI worked prior to 6.0 because among other > > things > > > > ACPI installed a power button handler which performed a clean > > shutdown > > > > (same as ctl-alt-del) rather than brute force yank-the-plug crash. > > > > Ok. BTW, FACS is an ACPI 2.0 table that replaces the FADT (I think), > > so > > > if > > your BIOS has an option to only do ACPI 1.0, you can try that to see > > if it > > > fixes the problem. > > > > -- > > John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ > > "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > > "freebsd-acpi-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org