Hi,
This PSD data contains the invalid "4" domain coordination type.
Jul 10 21:29:53 neptune unix: [ID 513276 kern.notice] NOTICE: Unknown domain
coordination type: 4
Comments inline with "<-".
...
Method (_PSD, 0, NotSerialized)
{
If (And (PDC0, 0x0800)) <- we use 0x800
{
Return (HPSD)
}
Return (SPSD)
}
Name (HPSD, Package (0x01)
{
Package (0x05)
{
0x05, <- correct
0x00, <- correct
0x00, <- correct
0x04, <- should be 0xFC, 0xFD, or 0xFE
0x80 <- should be # processors in domain
}
})
Name (SPSD, Package (0x01)
{
Package (0x05)
{
0x05,
0x00,
0x00,
0x04, <- should be 0xFC, 0xFD, or 0xFE
0x80 <- should be # processors in domain
}
})
I do not know why these contain invalid data?
Generally we should protect the OSPM from buggy ACPI values.
cpu_acpi_cache_state_dependencies() verifies fields 0 and 1.
It does not verify fields 3, 4, and 5.
It could/should verify field 4 is a valid coordination type.
Perhaps the function should also verify field 3 is not greater
than field 5, and verify field 5 is <= number of processors etc.
Regards,
Bill
On 07/13/10 04:03, John Martin wrote:
On 07/13/10 05:25 AM, Stefan Parvu wrote:
As requested the files attached/
# acpidump -a 0xBF7F8918 -l 0x41D> cpu0_ist.dat
# acpidump -a 0xBF7F7A98 -l 0x303> ap_ist.dat
Human readable files attached.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
pm-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-discuss
_______________________________________________
pm-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pm-discuss
