On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 11:23 PM Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 06, 2026 at 09:28:03PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > If acpi_dev_get_resources() returns overlapping I/O or memory resources, > > the subsequent registration of a platform device will fail with -EBUSY > > due to a resource conflict. This is reported to happen on Acer Aspire > > ES1-572 [1]. > > > > Avoid that by adjusting resources returned by acpi_dev_get_resources() > > to eliminate partial overlaps between them. > > > > This has not been regarded as necessary before because putting > > overlapping resources into the _CRS of one device is really pointless, > > but now that the issue has been reported to actually happen in the > > field, it needs to be done. > > ... > > > +static unsigned int acpi_platform_adjust_resources(struct acpi_device > > *adev, > > + struct resource *new_res, > > + struct resource *resources, > > + unsigned int count) > > +{ > > + unsigned int i; > > + > > + if (!(new_res->flags & (IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM))) > > + return count; > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < count; ) { > > + struct resource *res = &resources[i]; > > + > > + if (resource_type(new_res) != resource_type(res) || > > + !resource_overlaps(new_res, res)) { > > + i++; > > + continue; > > + } > > + > > + dev_info(&adev->dev, "Adjusting %pR for %pR\n", new_res, res); > > + /* > > + * Extend the new resource to include the one that has been > > processed > > + * already. > > + */ > > + if (res->start < new_res->start) > > + new_res->start = res->start; > > + > > + if (res->end > new_res->end) > > + new_res->end = res->end; > > Can we use resource_union() instead?
Not really. > > + /* > > + * Eliminate the previously processed resource that has > > + * triggered the adjustment because it is not necessary any > > + * more. > > + */ > > + memmove(res, res + 1, (--count - i) * sizeof(*res)); > > + } > > + > > + return count; > > +} > > --
