https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235876
--- Comment #3 from John Baldwin <[email protected]> --- Hmm, so I rechecked the spec and while it does say that bit 0 is ignored, the spec also includes QWordMemory which explicitly mentions the producer/consumer flag (e.g. 19.6.111). Andrew, do you have the acpidump of the Cavium box that was affected by this? It seems it was setting a reserved bit and relying on that reserved bit being ignored, whereas in this case Hyper-V and is setting the bit and relying on it being treated the same as it would be treated for other resource types? Both are undefined behavior, but the Cavium behavior seems to be more weird (setting a reserved bit and hoping it is ignored). Perhaps we can put '#ifdef __arm64__' around the res->Type part of the check? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
