Mark Kettenis wrote:
> Index: dev/acpi/dsdt.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/dev/acpi/dsdt.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.243
> diff -u -p -r1.243 dsdt.c
> --- dev/acpi/dsdt.c 19 Aug 2018 08:23:47 -0000 1.243
> +++ dev/acpi/dsdt.c 8 Jan 2019 18:55:14 -0000
> @@ -2905,29 +2905,33 @@ int
> acpi_event_wait(struct aml_scope *scope, struct aml_value *evt, int timeout)
> {
> /* Wait for event to occur; do work in meantime */
> - evt->v_evt.state = 0;
> - while (!evt->v_evt.state) {
> - if (!acpi_dotask(acpi_softc) && !cold)
> - tsleep(evt, PWAIT, "acpievt", 1);
> - else
> - delay(100);
> + while (evt->v_evt.state == 0 && timeout >= 0) {
> + if (acpi_dotask(acpi_softc))
> + continue;
> + if (!cold) {
> + if (rwsleep(evt, &acpi_softc->sc_lck, PWAIT,
> + "acpievt", 1) == EWOULDBLOCK) {
> + if (timeout < 0xffff)
> + timeout -= (1000 / hz);
> + }
> + } else {
> + delay(1000);
> + if (timeout < 0xffff)
> + timeout--;
> + }
Does 0xffff come from ACPI? Can we give that a name?
I thought sleeping for one tick is kinda weird, but I see what it's doing with
the acpi_dotask loop. This feels precarious, but whatever.
