Bug 207015
Summary: | Do not configure two power buttons with buggy firmware | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | ACPI | Reporter: | Paul Menzel (pmenzel+bugzilla.kernel.org) |
Component: | ACPICA-Core | Assignee: | acpi_acpica-core (acpi_acpica-core) |
Status: | CLOSED DOCUMENTED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | rui.zhang |
Priority: | P1 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Kernel Version: | 5.6-rc7 | Subsystem: | |
Regression: | No | Bisected commit-id: |
Description
Paul Menzel
2020-03-29 13:02:33 UTC
I think kernel does not enumerate the Fixed power button device when PWR_BUTTON is set to 1, so we're okay in this case. But according to the ACPI spec about "PWR_BUTTON", "A zero indicates the power button is handled as a fixed feature programming model; a one indicates the power button is handled as a control method device. If the system does not have a power button, this value would be “1” and no power button device would be present. Independent of the value of this field, the presence of a power button device in the namespace indicates to OSPM that the power button is handled as a control method device." So when PWR_BUTTON is 0, and there is control method power button device in ACPI namespace, we should enumerate and probe both, right? I have the impression that in some cases, control method power button is needed, because the power button event is SCI -> EC GPE -> ACPI Notify(PWRB), but I'm not sure if FADT PWR_BUTTON flag is set to 1 or not in this case. Hi, Paul, based on the ACPI spec, it seems that Linux is doing the right thing, aka, always registering the control method power button devices, even if PWR_BUTTON is 0. So this bug is closed. Please feel free to reopen it if you still have any questions. |