On Wed, 16 Jul 2014 17:08:03 -0400, Anthony Jenkins wrote: > On 07/16/2014 13:16, Ian Smith wrote: [..] > > > http://pastebin.com/P0B44u0c > > > > Either by show raw and save, or by download, the patch has ^M lineends.
> Bah! Well that'd explain it... I'm generating the file on a pure > FreeBSD box, opened in gvim, select all, copy, paste to pastebin.com. Must be pastebin .. a sh script I grabbed from there came like that too. > > Interesting, but I can't see atrtc.c being the right sort of place for > > this, seems way out of scope. Couldn't you include its headers and use > > functions rtcin() and writertc() from elsewhere in kernel, perhaps a > > module living in the same hierarchy as acpi_ibm, acpi_asus and such, > > that one could build and kldload if useful on a certain machine/s? > This is in support of the PNP0800 device, for which atrtc.c is the > driver. The ACPI spec (5.0 is what I'm reading) says that device > should implement a handler to read offset 0x00-0x7F. Fair enough. I've since explored PNP0800 a bit, had a look at what Linux does in (apparently recent) acpi_cmos_rtc.c, asm-generic/rtc.h etc from mit.edu - much more complex and quirk-handling than ours - and soon realised how out of date my knowledge of any of this is; ACPI was at 3.0 last time I read much of the spec .. > > If so, you haven't to do battle with Time Lords :) with something people > > could add and load at own risk without messing with core kernel stuff. > > > > acpi_ibm should be a useful template, as it includes code to read CMOS > > bytes in the 0x60-0x6f range, presumably updated by the BIOS, whether > > opaquely or somehow via AML code I don't know. It uses rtcin() so has > > that scope in place. > > > > I'd still like to see your patch reject attempts to read or write to at > > least below 0x10. Even reading status register/s resets interrupts, and > > why would anyone need to mess with clock and/or timer regs via ACPI? > I assume it'd be the BIOS AML which would use my CMOS region handler; > it'd be a BIOS bug that reads/writes the clock regs. Fair enough again. My earlier impression was of a fix for a specific quirk for your HP, not realising you were implementing what is for FreeBSD a new handler for a new(er) ACPI feature, so ignore my musings. > > Maybe you could add a sysctl to limit access to some specific range? > I dunno... I really think what I have is the Right Thing To Do... > Someone else from freebsd-acpi@ suggested this approach. Maybe > someone versed in ACPI could clarify from the spec? I'd be happy to see more on-list information, but everyone's busy .. cheers, Ian _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
