From owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org Sat Nov 23 06:08:51 2002
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.3) id gAML8pI37412;
	Sat, 23 Nov 2002 06:08:51 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail12.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.212])
	by castle.jp.FreeBSD.org (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.3) with ESMTP/inet id gAML8o237405
	for <acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org>; Sat, 23 Nov 2002 06:08:50 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org)
Received: (qmail 31036 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2002 21:08:03 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63])
          (envelope-sender <jhb@FreeBSD.org>)
          by mail12.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP
          for <iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org>; 22 Nov 2002 21:08:03 -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 gAML7s2D043750;
	Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:07:54 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org)
Message-ID: <XFMail.20021122160758.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: <B9ECACBD6885D5119ADC00508B68C1EA0D19B937@orsmsx107.jf.intel.com>
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>
Cc: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org, current@freebsd.org,
   Mitsuru IWASAKI <iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org>
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
Precedence: list
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 16:07:58 -0500
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 1974
Subject: [acpi-jp 1974] 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:
> Yes.  The spec appears to be ambiguous on this point.
> 
> I will change the GPE initialization so that if either the address or the
> length are zero, the block is not supported.
> 
> This will appear in the next release of the code.

Thanks.

> Bob
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Baldwin [mailto:jhb@FreeBSD.org] 
> Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 7:58 AM
> To: Moore, Robert
> Cc: Mitsuru IWASAKI; current@FreeBSD.org; acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org
> Subject: RE: [acpi-jp 1965] RE: Call for testers: acpica-unix-20021118.ta
> 
> 
> 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/

-- 

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