From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec  8 13:49:19 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FE87106566B;
	Tue,  8 Dec 2009 13:49:19 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from infofarmer@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from heka.cenkes.org (heka.cenkes.org [IPv6:2002:d056:e3f1::1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 487798FC15;
	Tue,  8 Dec 2009 13:49:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from amilo.cenkes.org (ppp91-77-236-58.pppoe.mtu-net.ru
	[91.77.236.58]) (Authenticated sender: sat)
	by heka.cenkes.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A0CBD2EF1F;
	Tue,  8 Dec 2009 16:03:53 +0300 (MSK)
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 16:49:14 +0300
From: Andrew Pantyukhin <infofarmer@freebsd.org>
To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20091208134913.GL98273@pollux.cenkes.org>
References: <20091208060339.GK98273@pollux.cenkes.org>
	<200912080749.55710.jhb@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200912080749.55710.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-OS: FreeBSD 8.0-BETA1 amd64
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: libi386/biosacpi.c - bad RSDP checksum search
X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: ACPI and power management development <freebsd-acpi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-acpi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 13:49:19 -0000

On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 07:49:55AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> Are you sure?  It looks like it keeps going if the checksum
> fails.  Note the 'continue' after the printf() about a bad
> checksum.

Oops. I obviously made a wrong assumption. I'll try to confirm.

I think the warning should be made less final: i.e. either do not
print it unless no correct RSDP has been found or print a success
message when it has.

Sorry for the noise.