https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #59 from Hans de Goede jwrdego...@fedoraproject.org 2011-02-27
08:51:30 ---
Hi,
(In reply to comment #54)
Kernel Version:
Linux ananias 2.6.37.2.uvesafb.nvidia #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Feb 27 00:11:07 CET
2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #54 from Liontos Aristotelis liontos.aristote...@gmail.com
2011-02-27 00:13:54 ---
Kernel Version:
Linux ananias 2.6.37.2.uvesafb.nvidia #1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Feb 27 00:11:07 CET
2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Distribution:
Debian GNU/Linux
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #55 from Liontos Aristotelis liontos.aristote...@gmail.com
2011-02-27 00:15:27 ---
Created an attachment (id=49342)
-- (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=49342)
dmesg
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #56 from Liontos Aristotelis liontos.aristote...@gmail.com
2011-02-27 00:15:54 ---
Created an attachment (id=49352)
-- (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=49352)
lspci -v
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #57 from Liontos Aristotelis liontos.aristote...@gmail.com
2011-02-27 00:17:41 ---
Created an attachment (id=49362)
-- (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=49362)
ioports
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #58 from Liontos Aristotelis liontos.aristote...@gmail.com
2011-02-27 00:19:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=49372)
-- (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=49372)
acpidump
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
Florian Mickler flor...@mickler.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||flor...@mickler.org
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
Len Brown l...@kernel.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||franxisco1988+ker...@gmail.
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
Carlo Wood ca...@alinoe.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ca...@alinoe.com
---
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #48 from Carlo Wood ca...@alinoe.com 2010-12-14 17:37:12 ---
Created an attachment (id=40122)
-- (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=40122)
Output of dmesg
Added attachment 'dmesg.out', see comment of 14 December
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #49 from Carlo Wood ca...@alinoe.com 2010-12-14 17:38:56 ---
Created an attachment (id=40132)
-- (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=40132)
Output of acpidump
Added attachment 'acpi.out', see comment of 14 December
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #50 from Carlo Wood ca...@alinoe.com 2010-12-14 17:40:40 ---
Created an attachment (id=40152)
-- (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=40152)
Output of lspci -vxxx
Added attachment 'lspci.out', see comment of 14
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #50 from Carlo Wood ca...@alinoe.com 2010-12-14 17:40:40 ---
Created an attachment (id=40152)
-- (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=40152)
Output of lspci -vxxx
Added attachment 'lspci.out', see comment of 14
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
ykzhao yakui.z...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liontos.aristote...@gmail.c
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
Len Brown len.br...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|CLOSED
--- Comment #45
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #42 from Hans de Goede jwrdego...@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-02
07:39:14 ---
(In reply to comment #41)
um, so we have the patch in comment #31 staged for 2.6.30...
but shouldn't we be changing the default to
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #43 from Jean Delvare kh...@linux-fr.org 2009-04-02 08:54:21 ---
Len, the patch in comment #32 was meant as a temporary fix for 2.6.29, it
wasn't meant for 2.6.30, but as far as I can see it was never applied in 2.6.29
so that
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
Len Brown len.br...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #20514|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
Len Brown len.br...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||len.br...@intel.com
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #40 from kh...@linux-fr.org 2009-03-19 00:40 ---
(In reply to comment #39)
So the better solution is to hide the SMbus PCI device. But how to hide it
depends on the chipset.
Actually not all SMBus devices can be
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #35 from mlconsult...@hotmail.com 2009-03-18 06:28 ---
I have the same conflict here with 2.6.28.7 on Asus P5Q SE Plus. I was just
wondering why this seems to happen mostly on Asus motherboard, and does this
means until
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #36 from cl...@vacuumtube.org.uk 2009-03-18 06:37 ---
If the P5Q uses the same chip as the P6T - w83667hg - patches are available for
native rather than atk0110 support
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #37 from kh...@linux-fr.org 2009-03-18 06:45 ---
You should not disable I2C support altogether. A lot of things need I2C
(framebuffer drivers, TV and DVB drivers...) which you could miss. You may
disable the i2c-i801 driver
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #38 from mlconsult...@hotmail.com 2009-03-18 07:08 ---
Thank you for your comments, I believe it is the i2c-i801 conflicting, after
adding the acpi_enforce_resources=strict boot option i get the dmesg below and
the i2c-i801
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #39 from yakui.z...@intel.com 2009-03-18 18:34 ---
After the boot option of acpi_enforce_resources=strict is added, the i2c-i801
driver won't be loaded for the smbus PCI device again when the conflict is
detected. The
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #34 from len.br...@intel.com 2009-03-15 12:48 ---
patch in comment #31 applied to acpi-test tree
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
yakui.z...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #33 from kh...@linux-fr.org 2009-03-13 01:50 ---
Who is pushing this patch upstream?
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
kh...@linux-fr.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #26 from jwrdego...@fedoraproject.org 2009-03-10 02:01 ---
IIRC, we had agreed up on changing the default for acpi_enforce_resources to
strict in general?
Atleast that is what seemed to be the consensus after a discussion
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #27 from yakui.z...@intel.com 2009-03-10 02:54 ---
Hi, Jean
Sorry that I don't attach the updated patch(In the updated patch the
__cpuinitdata is already changed to __initdata). There is an EEEPC-901 in my
hand. So I
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #28 from kh...@linux-fr.org 2009-03-10 03:37 ---
Hans, I have no objection to changing the default to strict in general. However
rc7 seems a little late for such a big change. Also I think we agreed that the
atk0110 driver
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #29 from jwrdego...@fedoraproject.org 2009-03-10 03:40 ---
Jean, I didn't know there were issues which needed fixing for 2.6.29, I agree
then that a blacklist if a good (temporary) solution for 2.6.29, and then we
can
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
yakui.z...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #20476|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #31 from sits...@yahoo.com 2009-03-10 06:55 ---
Created an attachment (id=20483)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=20483action=view)
dmidecode output for EeePC 900
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
sits...@yahoo.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #20483|application/octet-stream|text/plain
mime type|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #24 from yakui.z...@intel.com 2009-03-09 20:23 ---
Created an attachment (id=20476)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=20476action=view)
Add the dmi check to make acpi_enforce_resources strict
--
Configure
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
yakui.z...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #22 from kh...@linux-fr.org 2009-03-05 00:53 ---
The unhiding quirk is only applied for machines on which we know it is safe
(that is, neither ACPI nor SMM are accessing the SMBus.) So this isn't related
to the resource
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #23 from kh...@linux-fr.org 2009-03-05 00:55 ---
(In reply to comment #19)
I'm still wondering, as bug #12706 is a regression,
is acpi_enforce_resources=strict the right fix for this bug?
or do we still need to find out
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #21 from yakui.z...@intel.com 2009-03-04 23:26 ---
It is a good idea to hide the SMbus device. In such case the i2c-i801 driver
won't be loaded for the SMbus PCi controller, which can avoid the conflict
between ACPI AML and
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #20 from tr...@suse.de 2009-02-27 02:37 ---
Weren't there patches to hide or make the SMBus visible again?
Maybe this could be related?
I could imagine hiding SMBus and thus make some hwmon drivers not loading,
could
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #18 from yakui.z...@intel.com 2009-02-26 00:12 ---
From the info in bug 12706#c25 we know that the box can work well after adding
the boot option of acpi_enforce_resources=strict although the following
warning message is
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
kh...@linux-fr.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tr...@suse.de
--
Configure
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
kh...@linux-fr.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jwrdego...@fedoraproject.org
--
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #19 from rui.zh...@intel.com 2009-02-26 01:12 ---
this conflict warning seems harmless on this laptop,
but it does indicate a problem on an eeepc901, please refer to bug #12706.
I'm still wondering, as bug #12706 is a
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
rui.zh...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zmey...@fastmail.fm
---
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
rui.zh...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||r...@sisk.pl
--- Comment #17
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
rui.zh...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kh...@linux-fr.org,
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #15 from sits...@yahoo.com 2009-02-15 00:26 ---
(Gary has informed me that only the ASSIGNEE can change the NEEDINFO state. My
bad and apologies for the noise)
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
yakui.z...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #11 from cl...@vacuumtube.org.uk 2009-02-10 01:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=20177)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=20177action=view)
Output from acpidump
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #12 from cl...@vacuumtube.org.uk 2009-02-10 01:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=20178)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=20178action=view)
Output from dmidecode
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #13 from cl...@vacuumtube.org.uk 2009-02-10 01:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=20179)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=20179action=view)
Output from lspci -vxxx
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #9 from imr...@gmail.com 2009-01-12 17:25 ---
(In reply to comment #8)
So the i2c-i801 driver had better not be loaded for the SMbus PCI device.
From the acpidump it seems that the SMBus I/O port is accessed in
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #8 from yakui.z...@intel.com 2009-01-11 18:54 ---
Hi, Gergely
Sorry for the late response.
From the acpidump/lspci it seems that the SMbus I/O port(0x400-0x41f) is
used by ACPI AML code. And the I/O port of SMbus
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #4 from imr...@gmail.com 2009-01-07 04:11 ---
Created an attachment (id=19692)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=19692action=view)
acpidump output
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #3 from imr...@gmail.com 2009-01-07 04:07 ---
Created an attachment (id=19691)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=19691action=view)
dmidecode output
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #2 from imr...@gmail.com 2009-01-07 04:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=19690)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=19690action=view)
PCI devices reported by lspci
--
Configure bugmail:
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #1 from imr...@gmail.com 2009-01-07 04:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=19689)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=19689action=view)
dmesg log during boot-up up to the point of the reported conflict
--
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
yakui.z...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||acpi-
|
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
yakui.z...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|acpi_ot...@kernel- |yakui.z...@intel.com
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
yakui.z...@intel.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO
--- Comment #5
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #6 from imr...@gmail.com 2009-01-07 17:45 ---
Hi,
Yes, even if I don't load the eeepc-laptop module, the result is the same.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12376
--- Comment #7 from imr...@gmail.com 2009-01-07 17:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=19711)
-- (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=19711action=view)
lspci -vxxx output for more detailed information
--
Configure bugmail:
65 matches
Mail list logo
