https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=201133

            Bug ID: 201133
           Summary: ACPI BIOS Error (bug): Failure creating
                    [\_SB.PCI0._OSC.CAPB], AE_ALREADY_EXISTS - Toshiba
                    NB250 Netbook
           Product: ACPI
           Version: 2.5
    Kernel Version: 4.*
          Hardware: x86-64
                OS: Linux
              Tree: Mainline
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P1
         Component: BIOS
          Assignee: [email protected]
          Reporter: [email protected]
        Regression: No

Hello,

My Toshiba NB250 netbook, with a Intel Atom N455 processor suffers from the
following ACPI error messages upon boot:

> ACPI BIOS Error (bug): Failure creating [\_SB.PCI0._OSC.CAPB],
> AE_ALREADY_EXISTS (20180531/dsfield-179)
> ACPI Error: Method parse/execution failed \_SB.PCI0._OSC, AE_ALREADY_EXISTS
> (20180531/psparse-516)

The netbook works fine, but there are some side effects. ASPM gets disabled,
acpi_backlight works while intel_backlight doesn't, and SpeedStep support isn't
recognized. The latter is the most severe issue: when in steady state, the
processor doesn't slow down the frequency and gets overheated, to the point the
fan can't stop spinning. Not only this is very uncomfortable, but also affects
the battery duration.

I don't know to which extent these issues are caused by this ACPI error, but
since they seem related, I thought it'd best to start investigating here.

I have already read the following similar bug report:

"[CAPB] Namespace lookup failure, AE_ALREADY_EXISTS - Samsung NF310 Netbook"
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23442

Which continues in the ACPICA bugzilla:
https://bugs.acpica.org/show_bug.cgi?id=946

And gets to this conclusion:

> ACPICA behavior is correct in this case as it:
> 1) Follows the ACPI specification
> 2) Behaves exactly the same as Windows

Still, I decided to submit a new bug report because the manufacturer is
different (Toshiba instead of Samsung) and because the resolution above doesn't
change the fact that ASPM gets disabled: will everything work just as fine if I
then force ASPM?

I will be enclosing the output of acpidump and other information.

Thank you very much.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching the assignee of the bug.

_______________________________________________
acpi-bugzilla mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acpi-bugzilla

Reply via email to