[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
Subject[patch 25/26] ACPI: Clarify resource conflict message
2.6.31-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

From: Jean Delvare <>

commit 14f03343ad1080c2fea29ab2c13f05b976c4584e upstream.

The message "ACPI: Device needs an ACPI driver" is misleading. The
device _may_ need an ACPI driver, if the BIOS implemented a custom
API for the device in question (which, AFAIK, can't be checked.) If
not, then either a generic ACPI driver may be used (for example
"thermal"), or nothing can be done (other than a white list).

I propose to reword the message to:

ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available for this device, you should use
it instead of the native driver

which I think is more correct. Comments and suggestions welcome.

I also added a message warning about possible problems and system
instability when users pass acpi_enforce_resources=lax, as suggested
by Len.

Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <>
Cc: Thomas Renninger <>
Cc: Alan Jenkins <>
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <>

drivers/acpi/osl.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
@@ -1182,7 +1182,13 @@ int acpi_check_resource_conflict(struct
(long long) res_list_elem->start,
(long long) res_list_elem->end);
- printk(KERN_INFO "ACPI: Device needs an ACPI driver\n");
+ if (acpi_enforce_resources == ENFORCE_RESOURCES_LAX)
+ printk(KERN_NOTICE "ACPI: This conflict may"
+ " cause random problems and system"
+ " instability\n");
+ printk(KERN_INFO "ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available"
+ " for this device, you should use it instead of"
+ " the native driver\n");
if (acpi_enforce_resources == ENFORCE_RESOURCES_STRICT)
return -EBUSY;

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-10 01:45    [W:0.269 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site