01.07.2020 15:48, Anthony PERARD wrote: > I actually tried, but when reading `addr` or `addr+1` I had the same > value. So I guess `addr` wasn't taken into account.
AFAICS, these registers aren't actually supposed to be accessed like this as addr+1. ACPI and ISA spec states multiple times that `addr' should be accessible as 8/16/32 bits, but it does not mention `addr+1' or `addr+2'. So far all now-rejected accesses we've seen (not that many but still) goes to `addr', not to any other variation of it. /mjt
