On 2016/6/3 17:58, Gabriele Paoloni wrote: > Hi Dongdong > > Thanks for flagging this > > +to: Taku Izumi <izumi.t...@jp.fujitsu.com> > > Gab > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: linuxarm-boun...@huawei.com [mailto:linuxarm-boun...@huawei.com] >> On Behalf Of Dongdong Liu >> Sent: 03 June 2016 10:38 >> To: netdev@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: Linuxarm >> Subject: [bug discuss] fjes driver call trace warning, "PNP0C02" used >> in fjes seems like a bug, >> >> Hi all: >> >> The bug is recorded in https://bugs.linaro.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2292. >> >> "PNP0C02" attached two modules drivers/pnp/system.c and >> drivers/net/fjes/fjes_main.c . >> "fjes" driver lead to the call trace. >> >> system.c: >> static const struct pnp_device_id pnp_dev_table[] = { >> /* General ID for reserving resources */ >> {"PNP0c02", 0}, >> /* memory controller */ >> {"PNP0c01", 0}, >> {"", 0} >> }; >> >> jes_main.c: >> static const struct acpi_device_id fjes_acpi_ids[] = { >> {"PNP0C02", 0}, >> {"", 0}, >> }; >> >> Both of the modules use id "PNP0C02" (case insensitive), >> >> I used "PNP0C02" to mark motherboard reserved resource as below in >> UEFI. >> Device (RES1) >> { >> Name (_HID, "HISI0081") // HiSi PCIe RC config baseaddress >> Name (_CID, "PNP0C02") // Motherboard reserved resource >> Name (_CRS, ResourceTemplate (){ >> Memory32Fixed (ReadWrite, 0xb0080000 , 0x10000) >> }) >> } >> >> I think that "PNP0C02" should be used to mark any motherboard reserved >> resource and not a specific network driver. >> It seems like a bug in the "fjes" driver.
I agree, PNP0C02 is not a valid ACPI device HID but only for reserved resources. Thanks Hanjun
