From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 9 15:19:09 2009 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 29D6D106568D; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:19:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EECF08FC1A; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:19:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (66.111.2.69.static.nyinternet.net [66.111.2.69]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EF8346B03; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 10:19:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.9]) by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPA id EC6818A01F; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 10:19:07 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: Andrew Pantyukhin Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 10:02:55 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (FreeBSD/7.2-CBSD-20091103; KDE/4.3.1; amd64; ; ) References: <20091208060339.GK98273@pollux.cenkes.org> <20091208134913.GL98273@pollux.cenkes.org> <20091209103248.GP98273@pollux.cenkes.org> In-Reply-To: <20091209103248.GP98273@pollux.cenkes.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200912091002.55490.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Wed, 09 Dec 2009 10:19:07 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.1 at bigwig.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=4.2 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on bigwig.baldwin.cx 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:19:09 -0000 On Wednesday 09 December 2009 5:32:49 am Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 04:49:13PM +0300, Andrew Pantyukhin wrote: > > Oops. I obviously made a wrong assumption. I'll try to confirm. > > Yep, the good RSDP is found later. > > So I think either a "bad checksum" should be followed by a "good > checksum" or it should only be printed if no good RSDP has been > found. Attached are a couple of alternative tiny patches. > > Otherwise, a FAQ entry should be added to keep the mere mortals > like me from wondering about the error message. FWIW, it comes up > on many (most?) IBM System x machines. We can probably just drop the message altogether I think. The ACPI stuff the loader does is just advisory. The kernel will give more detailed notes about a bad checksum if needed. -- John Baldwin