On 01/29/2018, 01:56 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
From: Rafael J. Wysocki rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com
commit c2a6bbaf0c5f90463a7011a295bbdb7e33c80b51 upstream.
The way acpi_find_child_device() works currently is that, if there are two (or more) devices with the same _ADR value in the same namespace scope (which is not specifically allowed by the spec and the OS behavior in that case is not defined), the first one of them found to be present (with the help of _STA) will be returned.
This covers the majority of cases, but is not sufficient if some of the devices in question have a _HID (or _CID) returning some valid ACPI/PNP device IDs (which is disallowed by the spec) and the ASL writers' expectation appears to be that the OS will match devices without a valid ACPI/PNP device ID against a given bus address first.
To cover this special case as well, modify find_child_checks() to prefer devices without ACPI/PNP device IDs over devices that have them.
Suggested-by: Mika Westerberg mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com Tested-by: Hans de Goede hdegoede@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby jslaby@suse.cz
You seem you took this from SLE12-SP2? But where did you take the upstream commit SHA from? In SLE, I have "Git-commit: fdad4e7a876a2..." which is the correct SHA of this patch. The above c2a6bbaf0c is a different patch. So are your scripts broken or is this a manual oversight?
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
drivers/acpi/glue.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/acpi/glue.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/glue.c @@ -99,13 +99,13 @@ static int find_child_checks(struct acpi return -ENODEV; /*
* If the device has a _HID (or _CID) returning a valid ACPI/PNP* device ID, it is better to make it look less attractive here, so that* the other device with the same _ADR value (that may not have a valid* device ID) can be matched going forward. [This means a second spec* violation in a row, so whatever we do here is best effort anyway.]
* If the device has a _HID returning a valid ACPI/PNP device ID, it is* better to make it look less attractive here, so that the other device* with the same _ADR value (that may not have a valid device ID) can be* matched going forward. [This means a second spec violation in a row,* so whatever we do here is best effort anyway.]
- return sta_present && list_empty(&adev->pnp.ids) ?
- return sta_present && !adev->pnp.type.platform_id ? FIND_CHILD_MAX_SCORE : FIND_CHILD_MIN_SCORE;
}