* PATCH: acpi_find_rsdp() diverges from ACPI specification
@ 2005-04-29 21:03 jermar
2005-04-29 21:43 ` Randy.Dunlap
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: jermar @ 2005-04-29 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: len.brown; +Cc: torvalds, aul.s.diefenbaugh, jun.nakajima, linux-kernel
Hello,
I found out that acpi_find_rsdp() tries to find the RSDP structure in an area
bit larger than the ACPI specification wants. The right interval should start
at 0xe0000 and end at 0xfffff. The search area is thus 128K+1B large.
Given the semantics of acpi_scan_rsdp(), the second argument should therefore be
the size, not the end address.
Should there be any comments, please email me directly as I don't regularily
read LKM.
Please, apply.
Jakub
--- linux-2.6.11.7/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-04-07 20:58:17.000000000
+0200
+++ linux-2.6.11.7-acpi-patch/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-04-29
21:39:08.000000000 +0200
@@ -644,7 +644,7 @@ acpi_find_rsdp (void)
*/
rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0, 0x400);
if (!rsdp_phys)
- rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0xE0000, 0xFFFFF);
+ rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0xE0000, 128*1024 + 1);
return rsdp_phys;
}
Signed-off-by: Jakub Jermar <jermar@itbs.cz>
----------------------------------------------------------------
Powered by http://www.hosting123.cz
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: PATCH: acpi_find_rsdp() diverges from ACPI specification
2005-04-29 21:03 PATCH: acpi_find_rsdp() diverges from ACPI specification jermar
@ 2005-04-29 21:43 ` Randy.Dunlap
2005-05-06 22:21 ` Jakub Jermar
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Randy.Dunlap @ 2005-04-29 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: jermar; +Cc: len.brown, torvalds, aul.s.diefenbaugh, jun.nakajima, linux-kernel
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:03:50 +0200 jermar@itbs.cz wrote:
| Hello,
|
| I found out that acpi_find_rsdp() tries to find the RSDP structure in an area
| bit larger than the ACPI specification wants. The right interval should start
| at 0xe0000 and end at 0xfffff. The search area is thus 128K+1B large.
The search area is thus 128 KB large, so I agree with the intent of
this patch, except for the +1B.
| Given the semantics of acpi_scan_rsdp(), the second argument should therefore be
| the size, not the end address.
Yes.
| Should there be any comments, please email me directly as I don't regularily
| read LKM.
|
| Please, apply.
|
| Jakub
|
| --- linux-2.6.11.7/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-04-07 20:58:17.000000000
| +0200
| +++ linux-2.6.11.7-acpi-patch/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-04-29
| 21:39:08.000000000 +0200
| @@ -644,7 +644,7 @@ acpi_find_rsdp (void)
| */
| rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0, 0x400);
| if (!rsdp_phys)
| - rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0xE0000, 0xFFFFF);
| + rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0xE0000, 128*1024 + 1);
Just drop the "+ 1".
|
| return rsdp_phys;
| }
---
~Randy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: PATCH: acpi_find_rsdp() diverges from ACPI specification
2005-04-29 21:43 ` Randy.Dunlap
@ 2005-05-06 22:21 ` Jakub Jermar
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Jermar @ 2005-05-06 22:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm
Cc: len.brown, Randy.Dunlap, torvalds, aul.s.diefenbaugh,
jun.nakajima, linux-kernel
Hello,
here I resend corrected patch for acpi_find_rsdp().
Please, apply this patch.
--- linux-2.6.11.7/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-04-07 20:58:17.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-2.6.11.7-acpi-patch/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-04-29 21:39:08.000000000 +0200
@@ -644,7 +644,7 @@ acpi_find_rsdp (void)
*/
rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0, 0x400);
if (!rsdp_phys)
- rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0xE0000, 0xFFFFF);
+ rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0xE0000, 128*1024);
return rsdp_phys;
}
Best regards,
Jakub
Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:03:50 +0200 jermar@itbs.cz wrote:
>
> | Hello,
> |
> | I found out that acpi_find_rsdp() tries to find the RSDP structure in an area
> | bit larger than the ACPI specification wants. The right interval should start
> | at 0xe0000 and end at 0xfffff. The search area is thus 128K+1B large.
>
> The search area is thus 128 KB large, so I agree with the intent of
> this patch, except for the +1B.
>
>
> | Given the semantics of acpi_scan_rsdp(), the second argument should therefore be
> | the size, not the end address.
>
> Yes.
>
> | Should there be any comments, please email me directly as I don't regularily
> | read LKM.
> |
> | Please, apply.
> |
> | Jakub
> |
> | --- linux-2.6.11.7/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-04-07 20:58:17.000000000
> | +0200
> | +++ linux-2.6.11.7-acpi-patch/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/boot.c 2005-04-29
> | 21:39:08.000000000 +0200
> | @@ -644,7 +644,7 @@ acpi_find_rsdp (void)
> | */
> | rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0, 0x400);
> | if (!rsdp_phys)
> | - rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0xE0000, 0xFFFFF);
> | + rsdp_phys = acpi_scan_rsdp (0xE0000, 128*1024 + 1);
> Just drop the "+ 1".
>
> |
> | return rsdp_phys;
> | }
>
>
> ---
> ~Randy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-05-06 22:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-04-29 21:03 PATCH: acpi_find_rsdp() diverges from ACPI specification jermar
2005-04-29 21:43 ` Randy.Dunlap
2005-05-06 22:21 ` Jakub Jermar
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).