Re: Somewhat important ACPI diff

2013-05-26 Thread Martijn van Duren 

Maybe a bit late, but this diff appears to have fixed my acpitz bug.[1]
Since it was somewhat irregular I wanted to test it for a little longer. 
Thank you so much for fixing this.


[1] http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-bugsm=136539785515806w=2

On 05/20/13 18:57, Mark Kettenis wrote:

As diagnosed by some other people (armani@, jcs@?) a while ago, our
code to deal with IndexField() operators in our AML interpreter is
quite broken.  It works for fields that are less than a byte in size,
but anything else is pretty much completely busted.  I wouldn't be
surprised if this is the cause of many ACPI-related problems.  One
that comes to mind are the ridiculous temperatures reported by
acpitz(4) that have been plaguing us since basically forever.

I don't have a lot of machines that have AML with IndexField()
operators.  I've verified that those return the correct values, but
this defenitely could use further testing on a wide variety of
i386/amd64 hardware please.


Index: dsdt.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/acpi/dsdt.c,v
retrieving revision 1.200
diff -u -p -r1.200 dsdt.c
--- dsdt.c  10 Apr 2013 01:35:55 -  1.200
+++ dsdt.c  20 May 2013 16:55:27 -
@@ -2221,8 +2221,9 @@ aml_evalhid(struct aml_node *node, struc
return (0);
  }

-void aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int);
  void aml_rwgas(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int, int);
+void aml_rwindexfield(struct aml_value *, struct aml_value *val, int);
+void aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int);

  /* Get PCI address for opregion objects */
  int
@@ -2341,6 +2342,81 @@ aml_rwgas(struct aml_value *rgn, int bpo
aml_freevalue(tmp);
  }

+
+void
+aml_rwindexfield(struct aml_value *fld, struct aml_value *val, int mode)
+{
+   struct aml_value tmp, *ref1, *ref2;
+   void *tbit, *vbit;
+   int vpos, bpos, blen;
+   int indexval;
+   int sz, len;
+
+   ref2 = fld-v_field.ref2;
+   ref1 = fld-v_field.ref1;
+   bpos = fld-v_field.bitpos;
+   blen = fld-v_field.bitlen;
+
+   memset(tmp, 0, sizeof(tmp));
+   tmp.refcnt = 99;
+
+   /* Get field access size */
+   switch (AML_FIELD_ACCESS(fld-v_field.flags)) {
+   case AML_FIELD_WORDACC:
+   sz = 2;
+   break;
+   case AML_FIELD_DWORDACC:
+   sz = 4;
+   break;
+   case AML_FIELD_QWORDACC:
+   sz = 8;
+   break;
+   default:
+   sz = 1;
+   break;
+   }
+
+   if (blen  aml_intlen) {
+   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD) {
+   /* Read from a large field: create buffer */
+   _aml_setvalue(val, AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFER,
+   (blen + 7)  3, 0);
+   }
+   vbit = val-v_buffer;
+   } else {
+   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD) {
+   /* Read from a short field: initialize integer */
+   _aml_setvalue(val, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, 0, 0);
+   }
+   vbit = val-v_integer;
+   }
+   tbit = tmp.v_integer;
+   vpos = 0;
+
+   indexval = (bpos  3)  ~(sz - 1);
+   bpos = bpos - (indexval  3);
+
+   while (blen  0) {
+   len = min(blen, (sz  3) - bpos);
+
+   /* Write index register */
+   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, indexval, 0);
+   aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
+   indexval += sz;
+
+   /* Read/write data register */
+   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, 0, 0);
+   if (mode == ACPI_IOWRITE)
+   aml_bufcpy(tbit, 0, vbit, vpos, len);
+   aml_rwfield(ref1, bpos, len, tmp, mode);
+   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD)
+   aml_bufcpy(vbit, vpos, tbit, 0, len);
+   vpos += len;
+   blen -= len;
+   bpos = 0;
+   }
+}
+
  void
  aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *fld, int bpos, int blen, struct aml_value *val,
  int mode)
@@ -2356,10 +2432,7 @@ aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *fld, int b
memset(tmp, 0, sizeof(tmp));
aml_addref(tmp, fld.write);
if (fld-v_field.type == AMLOP_INDEXFIELD) {
-   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, fld-v_field.ref3, 0);
-   aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
-   aml_rwfield(ref1, fld-v_field.bitpos, fld-v_field.bitlen,
-   val, mode);
+   aml_rwindexfield(fld, val, mode);
} else if (fld-v_field.type == AMLOP_BANKFIELD) {
_aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, fld-v_field.ref3, 0);
aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
@@ -2414,10 +2487,6 @@ aml_createfield(struct aml_value *field,
opcode == AMLOP_BANKFIELD) ?

Re: Somewhat important ACPI diff

2013-05-21 Thread Vadim Zhukov 
2013/5/20 Mark Kettenis mark.kette...@xs4all.nl

 As diagnosed by some other people (armani@, jcs@?) a while ago, our
 code to deal with IndexField() operators in our AML interpreter is
 quite broken.  It works for fields that are less than a byte in size,
 but anything else is pretty much completely busted.  I wouldn't be
 surprised if this is the cause of many ACPI-related problems.  One
 that comes to mind are the ridiculous temperatures reported by
 acpitz(4) that have been plaguing us since basically forever.

 I don't have a lot of machines that have AML with IndexField()
 operators.  I've verified that those return the correct values, but
 this defenitely could use further testing on a wide variety of
 i386/amd64 hardware please.


 Index: dsdt.c
 ===
 RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/acpi/dsdt.c,v
 retrieving revision 1.200
 diff -u -p -r1.200 dsdt.c
 --- dsdt.c  10 Apr 2013 01:35:55 -  1.200
 +++ dsdt.c  20 May 2013 16:55:27 -
 @@ -2221,8 +2221,9 @@ aml_evalhid(struct aml_node *node, struc
 return (0);
  }

 -void aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int);
  void aml_rwgas(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int,
 int);
 +void aml_rwindexfield(struct aml_value *, struct aml_value *val, int);
 +void aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int);

  /* Get PCI address for opregion objects */
  int
 @@ -2341,6 +2342,81 @@ aml_rwgas(struct aml_value *rgn, int bpo
 aml_freevalue(tmp);
  }

 +
 +void
 +aml_rwindexfield(struct aml_value *fld, struct aml_value *val, int mode)
 +{
 +   struct aml_value tmp, *ref1, *ref2;
 +   void *tbit, *vbit;
 +   int vpos, bpos, blen;
 +   int indexval;
 +   int sz, len;
 +
 +   ref2 = fld-v_field.ref2;
 +   ref1 = fld-v_field.ref1;
 +   bpos = fld-v_field.bitpos;
 +   blen = fld-v_field.bitlen;
 +
 +   memset(tmp, 0, sizeof(tmp));
 +   tmp.refcnt = 99;
 +
 +   /* Get field access size */
 +   switch (AML_FIELD_ACCESS(fld-v_field.flags)) {
 +   case AML_FIELD_WORDACC:
 +   sz = 2;
 +   break;
 +   case AML_FIELD_DWORDACC:
 +   sz = 4;
 +   break;
 +   case AML_FIELD_QWORDACC:
 +   sz = 8;
 +   break;
 +   default:
 +   sz = 1;
 +   break;
 +   }
 +
 +   if (blen  aml_intlen) {
 +   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD) {
 +   /* Read from a large field: create buffer */
 +   _aml_setvalue(val, AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFER,
 +   (blen + 7)  3, 0);
 +   }
 +   vbit = val-v_buffer;
 +   } else {
 +   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD) {
 +   /* Read from a short field: initialize integer */
 +   _aml_setvalue(val, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, 0, 0);
 +   }
 +   vbit = val-v_integer;
 +   }
 +   tbit = tmp.v_integer;
 +   vpos = 0;
 +
 +   indexval = (bpos  3)  ~(sz - 1);
 +   bpos = bpos - (indexval  3);
 +
 +   while (blen  0) {
 +   len = min(blen, (sz  3) - bpos);
 +
 +   /* Write index register */
 +   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, indexval, 0);
 +   aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
 +   indexval += sz;
 +
 +   /* Read/write data register */
 +   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, 0, 0);
 +   if (mode == ACPI_IOWRITE)
 +   aml_bufcpy(tbit, 0, vbit, vpos, len);
 +   aml_rwfield(ref1, bpos, len, tmp, mode);
 +   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD)
 +   aml_bufcpy(vbit, vpos, tbit, 0, len);
 +   vpos += len;
 +   blen -= len;
 +   bpos = 0;
 +   }
 +}
 +
  void
  aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *fld, int bpos, int blen, struct aml_value
 *val,
  int mode)
 @@ -2356,10 +2432,7 @@ aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *fld, int b
 memset(tmp, 0, sizeof(tmp));
 aml_addref(tmp, fld.write);
 if (fld-v_field.type == AMLOP_INDEXFIELD) {
 -   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER,
 fld-v_field.ref3, 0);
 -   aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
 -   aml_rwfield(ref1, fld-v_field.bitpos, fld-v_field.bitlen,
 -   val, mode);
 +   aml_rwindexfield(fld, val, mode);
 } else if (fld-v_field.type == AMLOP_BANKFIELD) {
 _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER,
 fld-v_field.ref3, 0);
 aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
 @@ -2414,10 +2487,6 @@ aml_createfield(struct aml_value *field,
 opcode == AMLOP_BANKFIELD) ?
 AML_OBJTYPE_FIELDUNIT :
 AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFERFIELD;
 -   if (opcode == AMLOP_INDEXFIELD)

Re: Somewhat important ACPI diff

2013-05-21 Thread Gregor Best 
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:15:02AM +0400, Vadim Zhukov wrote:
 [...]
 ThinkPad X201i, fine here for an half a day (running since the time you
 posted the diff). dmesg doesn't have any borked stuff, suspend/resume works
 fine, both for short and long periods.
 [...]

Likewise with my Thinkpad R61i.

-- 
Gregor Best

Somewhat important ACPI diff

2013-05-20 Thread Mark Kettenis 
As diagnosed by some other people (armani@, jcs@?) a while ago, our
code to deal with IndexField() operators in our AML interpreter is
quite broken.  It works for fields that are less than a byte in size,
but anything else is pretty much completely busted.  I wouldn't be
surprised if this is the cause of many ACPI-related problems.  One
that comes to mind are the ridiculous temperatures reported by
acpitz(4) that have been plaguing us since basically forever.

I don't have a lot of machines that have AML with IndexField()
operators.  I've verified that those return the correct values, but
this defenitely could use further testing on a wide variety of
i386/amd64 hardware please.


Index: dsdt.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/acpi/dsdt.c,v
retrieving revision 1.200
diff -u -p -r1.200 dsdt.c
--- dsdt.c  10 Apr 2013 01:35:55 -  1.200
+++ dsdt.c  20 May 2013 16:55:27 -
@@ -2221,8 +2221,9 @@ aml_evalhid(struct aml_node *node, struc
return (0);
 }
 
-void aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int);
 void aml_rwgas(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int, int);
+void aml_rwindexfield(struct aml_value *, struct aml_value *val, int);
+void aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int);
 
 /* Get PCI address for opregion objects */
 int
@@ -2341,6 +2342,81 @@ aml_rwgas(struct aml_value *rgn, int bpo
aml_freevalue(tmp);
 }
 
+
+void
+aml_rwindexfield(struct aml_value *fld, struct aml_value *val, int mode)
+{
+   struct aml_value tmp, *ref1, *ref2;
+   void *tbit, *vbit;
+   int vpos, bpos, blen;
+   int indexval;
+   int sz, len;
+
+   ref2 = fld-v_field.ref2;
+   ref1 = fld-v_field.ref1;
+   bpos = fld-v_field.bitpos;
+   blen = fld-v_field.bitlen;
+
+   memset(tmp, 0, sizeof(tmp));
+   tmp.refcnt = 99;
+
+   /* Get field access size */
+   switch (AML_FIELD_ACCESS(fld-v_field.flags)) {
+   case AML_FIELD_WORDACC:
+   sz = 2;
+   break;
+   case AML_FIELD_DWORDACC:
+   sz = 4;
+   break;
+   case AML_FIELD_QWORDACC:
+   sz = 8;
+   break;
+   default:
+   sz = 1;
+   break;
+   }
+
+   if (blen  aml_intlen) {
+   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD) {
+   /* Read from a large field: create buffer */
+   _aml_setvalue(val, AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFER,
+   (blen + 7)  3, 0);
+   }
+   vbit = val-v_buffer;
+   } else {
+   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD) {
+   /* Read from a short field: initialize integer */
+   _aml_setvalue(val, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, 0, 0);
+   }
+   vbit = val-v_integer;
+   }
+   tbit = tmp.v_integer;
+   vpos = 0;
+
+   indexval = (bpos  3)  ~(sz - 1);
+   bpos = bpos - (indexval  3);
+
+   while (blen  0) {
+   len = min(blen, (sz  3) - bpos);
+
+   /* Write index register */
+   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, indexval, 0);
+   aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
+   indexval += sz;
+
+   /* Read/write data register */
+   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, 0, 0);
+   if (mode == ACPI_IOWRITE)
+   aml_bufcpy(tbit, 0, vbit, vpos, len);
+   aml_rwfield(ref1, bpos, len, tmp, mode);
+   if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD)
+   aml_bufcpy(vbit, vpos, tbit, 0, len);
+   vpos += len;
+   blen -= len;
+   bpos = 0;
+   }
+}
+
 void
 aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *fld, int bpos, int blen, struct aml_value *val,
 int mode)
@@ -2356,10 +2432,7 @@ aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *fld, int b
memset(tmp, 0, sizeof(tmp));
aml_addref(tmp, fld.write);
if (fld-v_field.type == AMLOP_INDEXFIELD) {
-   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, fld-v_field.ref3, 0);
-   aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
-   aml_rwfield(ref1, fld-v_field.bitpos, fld-v_field.bitlen,
-   val, mode);
+   aml_rwindexfield(fld, val, mode);
} else if (fld-v_field.type == AMLOP_BANKFIELD) {
_aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, fld-v_field.ref3, 0);
aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
@@ -2414,10 +2487,6 @@ aml_createfield(struct aml_value *field,
opcode == AMLOP_BANKFIELD) ?
AML_OBJTYPE_FIELDUNIT :
AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFERFIELD;
-   if (opcode == AMLOP_INDEXFIELD) {
-   indexval = bpos  3;
-   bpos = 7;
-   }
 
if (field-type == AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFERFIELD 
data-type != AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFER)

Re: Somewhat important ACPI diff

2013-05-20 Thread Timo Myyrä 
Mark Kettenis mark.kette...@xs4all.nl writes:

 As diagnosed by some other people (armani@, jcs@?) a while ago, our
 code to deal with IndexField() operators in our AML interpreter is
 quite broken.  It works for fields that are less than a byte in size,
 but anything else is pretty much completely busted.  I wouldn't be
 surprised if this is the cause of many ACPI-related problems.  One
 that comes to mind are the ridiculous temperatures reported by
 acpitz(4) that have been plaguing us since basically forever.

 I don't have a lot of machines that have AML with IndexField()
 operators.  I've verified that those return the correct values, but
 this defenitely could use further testing on a wide variety of
 i386/amd64 hardware please.


 Index: dsdt.c
 ===
 RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/acpi/dsdt.c,v
 retrieving revision 1.200
 diff -u -p -r1.200 dsdt.c
 --- dsdt.c10 Apr 2013 01:35:55 -  1.200
 +++ dsdt.c20 May 2013 16:55:27 -
 @@ -2221,8 +2221,9 @@ aml_evalhid(struct aml_node *node, struc
   return (0);
  }
  
 -void aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int);
  void aml_rwgas(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int, int);
 +void aml_rwindexfield(struct aml_value *, struct aml_value *val, int);
 +void aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *, int, int, struct aml_value *, int);
  
  /* Get PCI address for opregion objects */
  int
 @@ -2341,6 +2342,81 @@ aml_rwgas(struct aml_value *rgn, int bpo
   aml_freevalue(tmp);
  }
  
 +
 +void
 +aml_rwindexfield(struct aml_value *fld, struct aml_value *val, int mode)
 +{
 + struct aml_value tmp, *ref1, *ref2;
 + void *tbit, *vbit;
 + int vpos, bpos, blen;
 + int indexval;
 + int sz, len;
 +
 + ref2 = fld-v_field.ref2;
 + ref1 = fld-v_field.ref1;
 + bpos = fld-v_field.bitpos;
 + blen = fld-v_field.bitlen;
 +
 + memset(tmp, 0, sizeof(tmp));
 + tmp.refcnt = 99;
 +
 + /* Get field access size */
 + switch (AML_FIELD_ACCESS(fld-v_field.flags)) {
 + case AML_FIELD_WORDACC:
 + sz = 2;
 + break;
 + case AML_FIELD_DWORDACC:
 + sz = 4;
 + break;
 + case AML_FIELD_QWORDACC:
 + sz = 8;
 + break;
 + default:
 + sz = 1;
 + break;
 + }
 +
 + if (blen  aml_intlen) {
 + if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD) {
 + /* Read from a large field: create buffer */
 + _aml_setvalue(val, AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFER,
 + (blen + 7)  3, 0);
 + }
 + vbit = val-v_buffer;
 + } else {
 + if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD) {
 + /* Read from a short field: initialize integer */
 + _aml_setvalue(val, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, 0, 0);
 + }
 + vbit = val-v_integer;
 + }
 + tbit = tmp.v_integer;
 + vpos = 0;
 +
 + indexval = (bpos  3)  ~(sz - 1);
 + bpos = bpos - (indexval  3);
 +
 + while (blen  0) {
 + len = min(blen, (sz  3) - bpos);
 +
 + /* Write index register */
 + _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, indexval, 0);
 + aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
 + indexval += sz;
 +
 + /* Read/write data register */
 + _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, 0, 0);
 + if (mode == ACPI_IOWRITE)
 + aml_bufcpy(tbit, 0, vbit, vpos, len);
 + aml_rwfield(ref1, bpos, len, tmp, mode);
 + if (mode == ACPI_IOREAD)
 + aml_bufcpy(vbit, vpos, tbit, 0, len);
 + vpos += len;
 + blen -= len;
 + bpos = 0;
 + }
 +}
 +
  void
  aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *fld, int bpos, int blen, struct aml_value *val,
  int mode)
 @@ -2356,10 +2432,7 @@ aml_rwfield(struct aml_value *fld, int b
   memset(tmp, 0, sizeof(tmp));
   aml_addref(tmp, fld.write);
   if (fld-v_field.type == AMLOP_INDEXFIELD) {
 - _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, fld-v_field.ref3, 0);
 - aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
 - aml_rwfield(ref1, fld-v_field.bitpos, fld-v_field.bitlen,
 - val, mode);
 + aml_rwindexfield(fld, val, mode);
   } else if (fld-v_field.type == AMLOP_BANKFIELD) {
   _aml_setvalue(tmp, AML_OBJTYPE_INTEGER, fld-v_field.ref3, 0);
   aml_rwfield(ref2, 0, aml_intlen, tmp, ACPI_IOWRITE);
 @@ -2414,10 +2487,6 @@ aml_createfield(struct aml_value *field,
   opcode == AMLOP_BANKFIELD) ?
   AML_OBJTYPE_FIELDUNIT :
   AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFERFIELD;
 - if (opcode == AMLOP_INDEXFIELD) {
 - indexval = bpos  3;
 - bpos = 7;
 - }
  
   if (field-type == AML_OBJTYPE_BUFFERFIELD 
   data-type !=

Re: Somewhat important ACPI diff

2013-05-20 Thread James Turner 
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 06:57:56PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
 As diagnosed by some other people (armani@, jcs@?) a while ago, our
 code to deal with IndexField() operators in our AML interpreter is
 quite broken.  It works for fields that are less than a byte in size,
 but anything else is pretty much completely busted.  I wouldn't be
 surprised if this is the cause of many ACPI-related problems.  One
 that comes to mind are the ridiculous temperatures reported by
 acpitz(4) that have been plaguing us since basically forever.
 
 I don't have a lot of machines that have AML with IndexField()
 operators.  I've verified that those return the correct values, but
 this defenitely could use further testing on a wide variety of
 i386/amd64 hardware please.
 

No regressions on Dell XPS 13 (L321X). hw.sensors.acpitz0.temp0 and
hw.sensors.acpitz1.temp0 still go from a normal reading (64 degC) to a
somewhat strange reading (27.80 degC) after suspend/resume. A reboot is
needed to get the normal temperature reading back.

hw.sensors.cpu{0-3}.temp0 continue to output correct readings post
suspend/resume.

-- 
James Turner

Re: Somewhat important ACPI diff

2013-05-20 Thread Kenneth R Westerback 
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 06:57:56PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
 As diagnosed by some other people (armani@, jcs@?) a while ago, our
 code to deal with IndexField() operators in our AML interpreter is
 quite broken.  It works for fields that are less than a byte in size,
 but anything else is pretty much completely busted.  I wouldn't be
 surprised if this is the cause of many ACPI-related problems.  One
 that comes to mind are the ridiculous temperatures reported by
 acpitz(4) that have been plaguing us since basically forever.
 
 I don't have a lot of machines that have AML with IndexField()
 operators.  I've verified that those return the correct values, but
 this defenitely could use further testing on a wide variety of
 i386/amd64 hardware please.

6 amd64 boxes checked. 3 laptops, 3 non-laptops. intel procs (core
and atom) amd procs. Various vintages, nothing more recent than
12 months or so.

No regressions seen.

 Ken

Re: Somewhat important ACPI diff

2013-05-20 Thread Kyle Milz 
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 06:57:56PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
 As diagnosed by some other people (armani@, jcs@?) a while ago, our
 code to deal with IndexField() operators in our AML interpreter is
 quite broken.  It works for fields that are less than a byte in size,
 but anything else is pretty much completely busted.  I wouldn't be
 surprised if this is the cause of many ACPI-related problems.  One
 that comes to mind are the ridiculous temperatures reported by
 acpitz(4) that have been plaguing us since basically forever.
 
 I don't have a lot of machines that have AML with IndexField()
 operators.  I've verified that those return the correct values, but
 this defenitely could use further testing on a wide variety of
 i386/amd64 hardware please.

Asus UX31E ultrabook here. This patch fixes kernel panics on boot in
acpivout (get_bcl()), panics on AC plug/unplug, and battery information
is now present in sysctl hw.

Suspend/resume also gets further but still panics.

Thanks for the patch!