From c1116211a7b329c26b0370565c36b084ceb08f71 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ethan.zhao Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:21:12 -0800 Subject: [PATCH 642/642] To follow the ACPI spec 3,4&5 and keep the compatibility and latitude,only output mismatch warning when 64bit address and 32bit address of FACS/DSDT are all valid but not equal to each other. Signed-off-by: ethan.zhao --- drivers/acpi/acpica/tbfadt.c | 4 ++-- 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbfadt.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbfadt.c index 3906518..f23f512 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbfadt.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbfadt.c @@ -512,7 +512,7 @@ static void acpi_tb_validate_fadt(void) * the 32-bit and 64-bit address fields (FIRMWARE_CTRL/X_FIRMWARE_CTRL and * DSDT/X_DSDT) would indicate the presence of two FACS or two DSDT tables. */ - if (acpi_gbl_FADT.facs && + if ((acpi_gbl_FADT.facs && acpi_gbl_FADT.Xfacs) && (acpi_gbl_FADT.Xfacs != (u64)acpi_gbl_FADT.facs)) { ACPI_BIOS_WARNING((AE_INFO, "32/64X FACS address mismatch in FADT - " @@ -523,7 +523,7 @@ static void acpi_tb_validate_fadt(void) acpi_gbl_FADT.Xfacs = (u64)acpi_gbl_FADT.facs; } - if (acpi_gbl_FADT.dsdt && + if ((acpi_gbl_FADT.dsdt && acpi_gbl_FADT.Xdsdt) && (acpi_gbl_FADT.Xdsdt != (u64)acpi_gbl_FADT.dsdt)) { ACPI_BIOS_WARNING((AE_INFO, "32/64X DSDT address mismatch in FADT - " -- 1.7.1