On 16.12.2024 11:36, Ariel Otilibili-Anieli wrote: > On Monday, December 16, 2024 10:53 CET, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: > >> On 15.12.2024 16:40, Ariel Otilibili wrote: >>> * iasl complains _HID and _ADR cannot be used at the same time >>> >>> ``` >>> /usr/bin/iasl -vs -p tools/firmware/hvmloader/dsdt_anycpu.tmp -tc >>> tools/firmware/hvmloader/dsdt_anycpu.asl 2>&1 | grep -B10 HID >>> tools/firmware/hvmloader/dsdt_anycpu.asl 40: Device (PCI0) >>> Warning 3073 - Multiple types ^ >>> (Device object requires either a _HID or _ADR, but not both) >>> ``` >>> >>> * generally _HID devices are enumerated and have their drivers loaded by >>> ACPI >>> * this is from "ASL 2.0 Introduction and Overview" (page 4). >>> * removing _ADR, the warning is cleared out. >> >> Okay, that's the positive aspect. Yet what about the potential fallout >> thereof? >> Can you confirm that there's no risk of regressions with older guest OSes, >> for >> example? > > OSes that were released after ACPI 2.0 should work [1]; including WinXP: > The 2.0 specs says either _HID or _ADR should be included [2], not both > (Section 6.1, page 146).
We must be looking at two different variants of the spec then. My copy says "device object must contain either an _HID object or an _ADR object, but can contain both." Also still in 2.0c. I agree that in e.g. 6.5 the wording has changed. I also agree that the use of "either" doesn't help clarity. > I chose WinXP because, on another patch, it came up in the discussion [3]. And indeed appropriately so. Jan