From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 6 03:55:21 2006 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 576E916A41F for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2006 03:55:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnu.raiz@gmail.com) Received: from xproxy.gmail.com (xproxy.gmail.com [66.249.82.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A463F43D49 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2006 03:55:20 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnu.raiz@gmail.com) Received: by xproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id s9so2144132wxc for ; Thu, 05 Jan 2006 19:55:20 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=oBkSpFbpTQ9WmGi0AF8DNqh/CaxUdUENRr6E3eSfl/4diysnNJlt7b+9tDxsfwACkc2RUz8zezEV1hkZVgTowwT9irC/oSIZPJ2RPocfcgNmbv2QJ2eJsM8jmqTzJlN26ZcPN8nKp/tYtnJxRJjdcVvYhZIxwZoRo9Fwy3bBvAU= Received: by 10.70.109.10 with SMTP id h10mr12363315wxc; Thu, 05 Jan 2006 19:55:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.70.69.13 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Jan 2006 19:55:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2006 21:55:19 -0600 From: Gnu_Raiz To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <20060103151938.GD13887@poupinou.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20051222020349.GA16607@poupinou.org> <43AC2E52.8000304@root.org> <20060103151938.GD13887@poupinou.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: Z00Q Problem Tyan MB! 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: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 03:55:21 -0000 On 1/3/06, Bruno Ducrot wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 09:05:22AM -0800, Nate Lawson wrote: > > You can work around this problem with info from PR kern/89879 > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~ariff/acer_ferrari/ > > > > A future acpica import may address this problem. The aml is accessing = a > > field before it's defined. The newest acpica adds support for lazy > > evaluation (even though this is out of spec). > > No, it won't. There are the following devices: > > > Device (SIO) > { > ... > ... > > Method (STA, 1, NotSerialized) > { > ... > ... > } > > Device (COM1) > { > ... > Method (_STA, 0, NotSerialized) > { > Store (Z00Q, Local0) > And (Local0, 0x01, Local0) > If (LEqual (Local0, 0x01)) > { > Return (0x00) > } > Else > { > Return (STA(0x02)) > } > } > > Device (COM2) > { > ... > Method (_STA, 0, NotSerialized) > { > /* same _STA, but > * And (Local0, 0x02, Local0) > */ > ... > } > > > Device (LPT) > { > > ... > Method (_STA, ...) > { > /* same _STA, but different bits checked > */ > > } > } > > Since all of those _STA methods call SIO.STA() (and since this method > is used to touch a part of a SuperIO chip (io port 0x2E, etc) in order > to initialize some devices), it's very likely that the 3 devices will not > function even if acpica does lazy evaluations for > non-existing object. If I were the acpi maintainer of the intel acpica, > package, I would add a flag turned off per default. > > For the OP. I would suggest trying to add a Z00Q manually. > > --- rcall-TyanMP2460.asl 2006/01/03 14:47:05 1.1 > +++ rcall-TyanMP2460.asl 2006/01/03 15:10:58 > @@ -1256,6 +1256,7 @@ DefinitionBlock ("DSDT.aml", "DSDT", 1, > Device (SIO) > { > Name (_HID, EisaId ("PNP0A05")) > + Name (Z00Q, 1) // bit 1: COM1, bit 2: COM2, bit 3= : > LPT > OperationRegion (Z00M, SystemIO, 0x80, 0x01) > Field (Z00M, ByteAcc, NoLock, Preserve) > { > @@ -2394,6 +2395,8 @@ DefinitionBlock ("DSDT.aml", "DSDT", 1, > } > > Notify (\_SB.PWRB, 0x02) > + > + Return(Package(2){0,0}) > } > } > > > > > > and to change the value for Z00Q according to your needs (if you need > both serial ports, then it should be 3, etc). > > Cheers, > > -- > Bruno Ducrot > > -- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? > -- Don't know. Don't care. Ok I am now confused, so I should not use Z00C to fix Z00Q, Where should I add this proper code. I am willing to learn, but I am not an expert when it comes to this type of thing, after looking at asl file their seems to be many sections that relates to Z00Q. I would hate to put it into the wrong section, and not know after I compile it because the syntax was correct. So maybe someone can give me some pointers, as to what the proper way is to fix the file. Thanks; Gnu_Raiz