Re: pnpacpi : exceeded the max number of IO resources

From: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>
To: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Cc: Rene Herman <rene.herman@keyaccess.nl>,
	yakui.zhao@intel.com, Chris Holvenstot <cholvenstot@comcast.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bjorn.helgaas@hp.com,
	trenn@suse.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: pnpacpi : exceeded the max number of IO resources
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 09:15:40 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071204011540.GA2713@darkstar.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1196729713.13969.1.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com>

On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 08:55:13AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 18:02 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> > On 30-11-07 23:22, Rene Herman wrote:
> > 
> > > On 30-11-07 14:14, Chris Holvenstot wrote:
> > > 
> > >> For what it is worth I too have seen this problem this morning and it
> > >> DOES appear to be new (in contrast to a previous comment)
> > >>
> > >> The message:  pnpacpi: exceeded the max number of mem resources: 12
> > >>
> > >> is displayed each time the system is booted with the 2.6.24-rc3-git5
> > >> kernel but is NOT displayed when booting 2.6.24-rc3-git4
> > >>
> > >> I have made no changes in my config file between these two kernels other
> > >> than to accept any new defaults when running make oldconfig.
> > >>
> > >> If you had already narrowed it down to a change between git4 and git5 I
> > >> apologize for wasting your time.  Have to run to work now.
> > > 
> > > Thanks, and re-added the proper CCs. Sigh...
> > > 
> > > Well, yes, the warning is actually new as well. Previously your kernel 
> > > just silently ignored 8 more mem resources than it does now it seems.
> > > 
> > > Given that people are hitting these limits, it might make sense to just 
> > > do away with the warning for 2.6.24 again while waiting for the dynamic 
> > > code?
> > 
> > Ping. Should these warnings be reverted for 2.6.24?
> Revert the warning doesn't make any sense. I'd suggest changing the IO
> resources number bigger till Thomas's patch in.
Agree.
Change it to 90 works for me, But I think maybe 128 is better.

include/linux/pnp.h |    2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff -upr linux/include/linux/pnp.h linux.new/include/linux/pnp.h

--- linux/include/linux/pnp.h	2007-12-04 09:09:23.000000000 +0800
+++ linux.new/include/linux/pnp.h	2007-12-04 09:09:40.000000000 +0800
@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@
 #include <linux/errno.h>
 #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
 
-#define PNP_MAX_PORT		24
+#define PNP_MAX_PORT		128
 #define PNP_MAX_MEM		12
 #define PNP_MAX_IRQ		2
 #define PNP_MAX_DMA		2
