On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 12:22:37PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]> > > 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. > > Fixes: ab06eb920401 ("ACPI: scan: Register platform devices for fixed event > buttons") > Reported-by: Julien <[email protected]> > Closes: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-integrity/cajogg3z6ljpdsdpnbxajgy8_wqxfhybrxe4eiurzf3kpu5a...@mail.gmail.com/ > [1] > Cc: All applicable <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]> > --- > > v2 -> v3: > * Use resource_union() and adjust code and comment (Andy) > * Include ioport.h directly > > v1 -> v2: > * Add the expanded resource instead of and not in addition to the other > overlapping one (Sashiko) > > --- > drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > #include <linux/bits.h> > #include <linux/device.h> > #include <linux/err.h> > +#include <linux/ioport.h> > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/module.h> > #include <linux/dma-mapping.h> > @@ -71,6 +72,36 @@ static struct notifier_block acpi_platfo > .notifier_call = acpi_platform_device_remove_notify, > }; > > +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_union(new_res, res, new_res)) { > + i++; > + continue; > + } > + > + dev_info(&adev->dev, "%pR expanded to avoid overlap\n", > new_res); > + /* > + * Eliminate the previously processed resource that overlapped > + * with the new one because it is not necessary any more. > + */ > + memmove(res, res + 1, (--count - i) * sizeof(*res)); > + } > + > + return count; > +} > + > static void acpi_platform_fill_resource(struct acpi_device *adev, > const struct resource *src, struct resource *dest) > { > @@ -151,10 +182,14 @@ struct platform_device *acpi_create_plat > return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > } > count = 0; > - list_for_each_entry(rentry, &resource_list, node) > + list_for_each_entry(rentry, &resource_list, node) { > + count = acpi_platform_adjust_resources(adev, > + > rentry->res, > + > resources, > + count); > acpi_platform_fill_resource(adev, rentry->res, > > &resources[count++]); > - > + } > acpi_dev_free_resource_list(&resource_list); > } > } > > >
Applied to my tree I'll just run some tests. BR, Jarkko
