From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 9 14:47:09 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A371937B401 for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2003 14:47:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail11.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.211]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D27C43FAF for ; Wed, 9 Jul 2003 14:47:09 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 11048 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2003 21:47:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )encrypted SMTP for ; 9 Jul 2003 21:47:08 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h69Ll0GI099973; Wed, 9 Jul 2003 17:47:04 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.4 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20030709113003.L4186@root.org> Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 17:47:14 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: Nate Lawson cc: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: PATCH - updated EC driver X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2003 21:47:09 -0000 On 09-Jul-2003 Nate Lawson wrote: > On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, John Baldwin wrote: >> On 09-Jul-2003 Nate Lawson wrote: >> > http://root.org/~nate/freebsd/ec-new.diff >> >> Not as broken as the last patch, but still broken for me: >> >> ACPI-0432: *** Error: Handler for [EmbeddedControl] returned AE_NO_HARDWARE_RESPONSE >> ACPI-1287: *** Error: Method execution failed [\\_SB_.PCI0.PX41.SECN.BEXT] (Node >> 0xc3342260), >> AE_NO_HARDWARE_RESPONSE >> ACPI-1287: *** Error: Method execution failed [\\_SB_.PCI0.PX41.SECN.MAST._STA] (Node >> 0xc3342320), AE_NO_HARDWARE_RESPONSE > > Thanks for testing. > > Try changing the 1000 in line 658 to 10000. Your EC seems to take more > than 1 ms to respond. The old behavior was 10 ms which I thought was too > long but apparently your system requires this. Yes, this gets rid of the message at boot times. I do get some of these messages while the system is running, but I used to receive those erros before. The only difference is that now the error code is AE_NO_HARDWARE_RESPONSE rather than AE_ERROR. > BTW, what are the guidelines for DELAY vs. msleep? I'm holding a mutex > for the local EC for up to 10 ms in that case, in increments of DELAY(10). > I would think that somewhere around 1 ms, the delay needs to become an > msleep so other device interrupts can occur (i.e. EcGpeHandler). I'm > thinking about having the loop up to 1 ms be based on DELAY, and then 9 > calls to msleep(..., 1) for the really slow devices. Let me know what you > think is best. That sounds fine to me. 10ms would be a very long time to hold a mutex. > -Nate -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/