From owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org Sat Nov 23 00:57:51 2002
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.3) id gAMFvpU27742;
	Sat, 23 Nov 2002 00:57:51 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail14.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.214])
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.3) with ESMTP/inet id gAMFvo227735
	for <acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 00:57:50 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org)
Received: (qmail 15240 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2002 15:57:38 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63])
          (envelope-sender <jhb@FreeBSD.org>)
          by mail14.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP
          for <acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org>; 22 Nov 2002 15:57:38 -0000
Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1])
	by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gAMFvY2D042672;
	Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:57:34 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org)
Message-ID: <XFMail.20021122105739.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.2 on FreeBSD
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <B9ECACBD6885D5119ADC00508B68C1EA0D19B934@orsmsx107.jf.intel.com>
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>
Cc: Mitsuru IWASAKI <iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org>, current@freebsd.org,
   "acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org" <acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org>
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Precedence: list
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 10:57:39 -0500
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 1971
Subject: [acpi-jp 1971] RE: Call for testers: acpica-unix-20021118.ta
Errors-To: owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
X-Originator: jhb@FreeBSD.org
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+021111


On 22-Nov-2002 Moore, Robert wrote:
> 
> Unfortunately, the ACPI specification also says this:
> 
> "Each register block contains two registers of equal length: GPEx_STS and
> GPEx_EN (where x is 0 or 1). The length of the GPE0_STS and GPE0_EN
> registers is equal to half the GPE0_LEN. The length of the GPE1_STS and
> GPE1_EN registers is equal to half the GPE1_LEN. If a generic register block
> is not supported then its respective block pointer and block length values
> in the FADT table contain zeros. The GPE0_LEN and GPE1_LEN do not need to be
> the same size."
> 
> 
> I guess that we will have to code it this way -- if EITHER the GPE1_BLK or
> GPE1_BLK_LEN is zero, there is no GPE1.  Likewise with the GPE0 block.

Well, if you look at page 102 of the spec in the description of the FADT
fields, it says for GPE0_BLK and GPE1_BLK both that "if this register block
is not supported, this field contains zero", by which I take it to mean that
GPE[01]_BLK_LEN's values are undefined if the corresponding GPE[01]_BLK values
are zero.

> Bob
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Moore, Robert [mailto:robert.moore@intel.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 3:00 PM
> To: 'acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org'; John Baldwin
> Cc: current@freebsd.org; Mitsuru IWASAKI
> Subject: [acpi-jp 1965] RE: Call for testers: acpica-unix-20021118.tar .gz
> 
> 
> 
>       DSDT=0x3ffbf77
>       INT_MODEL=PIC
>       SCI_INT=9
>       SMI_CMD=0xb1, ACPI_ENABLE=0xf0, ACPI_DISABLE=0xf1, S4BIOS_REQ=0x0
>       PM1a_EVT_BLK=0x1000-0x1003
>       PM1a_CNT_BLK=0x1004-0x1005
>       PM2_CNT_BLK=0x1030-0x1030
>       PM2_TMR_BLK=0x1008-0x100b
>       PM2_GPE0_BLK=0x1018-0x101b
>       P_LVL2_LAT=200ms, P_LVL3_LAT=2000ms
>       FLUSH_SIZE=0, FLUSH_STRIDE=0
>       DUTY_OFFSET=1, DUTY_WIDTH=3
>       DAY_ALRM=72, MON_ALRM=73, CENTURY=50
>       Flags={WBINVD,PROC_C1,SLP_BUTTON,TMR_VAL_EXT}
> 
> Juli, John,
> 
> This is interesting that no GPE1 information shows up.
> 
> It may be the case that GPE1_BLK is zero, but GPE1_BLK_LEN is not zero in
> the FADT.
> 
> According to the ACPI spec, only (GPE1_BLK == 0) indicates that there is no
> GPE1 block;  It may be that if GPE1_BLK_LEN is non-zero, but GPE1_BLK is
> zero, the CA code is not handling this correctly.  I will investigate and
> report back.
> 
> Bob

-- 

John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!"  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/
