From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 1 20:24:14 2010 Return-Path: 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 62D671065670; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 20:24:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from robert.moore@intel.com) Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 264028FC1F; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 20:24:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Feb 2010 12:23:25 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,385,1262592000"; d="scan'208";a="592223288" Received: from orsmsx602.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.226.211]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Feb 2010 12:24:04 -0800 Received: from orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.226.47]) by orsmsx602.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.22.226.211]) with mapi; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 12:24:11 -0800 From: "Moore, Robert" To: Jung-uk Kim , Rui Paulo Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 12:24:10 -0800 Thread-Topic: ACPICA 20100121 regression Thread-Index: Acqjd/TR30b+d1bWQTCCZtIGFcoA8gAA5isw Message-ID: <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D83085855AF8381@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <875CBAC3-245A-4199-94DC-BBB047318681@freebsd.org> <201002011433.39506.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <976B4942-6DD5-438D-B8C3-1A1E7B1EDEC0@freebsd.org> <201002011451.09084.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201002011451.09084.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "Brown, Len" , "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" , "Lin, Ming M" Subject: RE: ACPICA 20100121 regression 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: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:24:14 -0000 The worst part of all is that if ACPICA returns TRUE for "Linux", the ASL c= ode executes down paths that often have never been tested. The goal of ACPICA is to be 100% compatible with the Windows ACPI implement= ation. As such, it returns TRUE for all Windows query strings. Note, _OSI was never intended to be a test for "which operating system is e= xecuting". It is meant to query the "set of ACPI-related interfaces, behavi= ors, or features that the operating system supports" (from ACPI specificati= on.) Thus, it is entirely appropriate for ACPICA to return TRUE for windows= strings. I guess the next question would be: why is the machine disabling things spe= cifically for Windows 7? Bob >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd- >acpi@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Jung-uk Kim >Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 11:51 AM >To: Rui Paulo >Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org >Subject: Re: ACPICA 20100121 regression > >On Monday 01 February 2010 02:36 pm, Rui Paulo wrote: >> On 1 Feb 2010, at 19:33, Jung-uk Kim wrote: >> > On Monday 01 February 2010 02:25 pm, Rui Paulo wrote: >> >> On 1 Feb 2010, at 19:21, Jung-uk Kim wrote: >> >>> On Saturday 30 January 2010 10:49 am, Rui Paulo wrote: >> >>>> Hi, >> >>>> Latest ACPICA can't find my ASUS010 HID. It worked fine with >> >>>> FreeBSD 8, which has ACPICA 20090521. >> >>>> >> >>>> The ASL is located at: >> >>>> http://people.freebsd.org/~rpaulo/asus-1005ha.asl.gz >> >>>> >> >>>> What I'm seeing is ACPI_ID_PROBE() returning always NULL for >> >>>> "ASUS010" and "ATK0100" devids. >> >>> >> >>> It seems the ASL disables ASUS010 when the OS is "Windows 2009" >> >>> (aka Windows 7). FYI, current ACPI-CA just returns okay for >> >>> any Microsoft OSes when _OSI method is used in ASL. Thus, it >> >>> thinks you are running Windows 7. You can comment out or >> >>> remove line 3626-3629 and override DSDT to re-enable the >> >>> device, I think. >> >> >> >> You're right, but I'm left wondering why it worked with a >> >> previous ACPICA. >> > >> > Because "Windows 2009" was added in 20090903. :-) >> >> I understand now. Still, I think this is ACPICA's fault, but I >> understand that other laptops may rely on this behavior from >> ACPICA, so the fix may cause even more problems.. > >I agree that it is ACPI-CA's fault but it was debated in Linux >community for a while and they decided it is the best course of >action for ACPI-CA, AFAIK. Basically, a lot of ACPI implementations >out there just disable some "features" based on Windows versions. >Even worse, many features are disabled when it matches "Linux". So, >they decided returning the latest and greatest Windows version >instead is the best choice. Luckily (or unluckily), not so many ACPI >implementations match "FreeBSD". :-( > >Jung-uk Kim >_______________________________________________ >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"