Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 14:14:54 -0700 From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: smbios.ko probes successfully if i disable acpi sysresource, fails if i do not Message-ID: <4541254E.5020108@root.org> In-Reply-To: <200610261423.04670.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <FBFBCF13-54B0-4825-A115-4CDDE4215CD7@utzweb.net> <4540E242.8080100@root.org> <200610261423.04670.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote: > On Thursday 26 October 2006 12:28, Nate Lawson wrote: >> John Utz wrote: >>> Hello; >>> >>> as you may know i am attempting to use fbsd's smbios functionality to >>> support porting the linux i8k-utils dell smbios keyboard and fan stuff. >>> >>> i just discovered today that disabling sysresource allows the module to >>> attach. >>> >>> so, here's the part that i'd love some help with understanding: >>> >>> 1. with acpi enabled, is smbios.ko supposed to be asking acpi for a >>> resource handle or something? >>> >>> 2. is acpi_resource.c behaving in error? should it not be consuming the >>> smbios startaddr? >>> >>> note that startaddr for smbios is 0xf000, bios.c looks for pnpbios and >>> pcibios starting at 0xe000 and completely ignores smbios. >>> >>> it seems to me that either statement 1 or 2 is correct, but not both. >>> >>> of course, i could be totally wrong, can anybody enlighten me? >> ACPI reserves sysresource objects for downstream devices. Then, those >> devices get the resources they request via ACPI. Anyway, all this >> should be transparent to the downstream devices. They shouldn't care if >> they're getting their resources from nexus (top, pseudo-device) or acpi. >> >> Are you using bus_alloc_resource() or the equivalent to get the >> resources in your driver? It transparently maps resource requests to >> upstream devices. Please send the output of devinfo -rv with your >> driver installed, both with and without sysresource enabled in ACPI. > > smbios is attached to nexus though, so acpi isn't upstream. > Why is smbios on nexus? It seems desirable to have it under the top-level bus, which would be acpi if it is not disabled. Also, npx should be there too (additional rationale: npx devices are defined in the acpi Device namespace). -- Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4541254E.5020108>