Subject: Re: Problems reading ACPI battery status on IBM ThinkPad T30
To: Takayoshi Kochi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Rafal Boni <email@example.com>
Date: 01/13/2004 11:56:37
In message <firstname.lastname@example.org>, you write:
-> From: Rafal Boni <email@example.com>
-> Subject: Problems reading ACPI battery status on IBM ThinkPad T30
-> Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2004 22:55:34 -0500
-> > acpi0: X/RSDT: OemId <IBM ,TP-1I ,00002060>, AslId < LTP,00000000>
-> > ACPI-1290: *** Error: Method execution failed [\_SB_.PCI0.LPC_.FDC_
-> ._INI] (Node 0xc0a24460), AE_NOT_EXIST
-> > ACPI-1290: *** Error: Method execution failed [\_SB_.PCI0.LPC_.EC__
-> ._INI] (Node 0xc0a1e860), AE_NOT_EXIST
-> > ACPI-0178: *** Error: Method execution failed [\_SB_.NEST._STA] (No
-> de 0xc0a24320), AE_NOT_EXIST
-> These errors (many AE_NOT_EXIST) is due to missing support for
-> ACPI ECDT support.
-> I put my incomplete ECDT patch at
-> (might not work right now)
I'll take a look at this in the next few days when I have some time and
can browse through the spec to get some clue of what this all means :-)
(getting things working better is a good carrot for getting more up
to speed on ACPI ;-).
-> > While performing this query, the kernel outputs:
-> > ACPI-1290: *** Error: Method execution failed [\_SB_.PCI0.LPC_.EC__.GBS
-> T] (Node 0xc0a1e140), AE_AML_INTERNAL
-> > ACPI-1290: *** Error: Method execution failed [\_SB_.PCI0.LPC_.EC__.BAT
-> 0._BST] (Node 0xc0a1e000), AE_AML_INTERNAL
-> > acpibat0: failed to evaluate _BST: AE_AML_INTERNAL
-> These errors are source of my headache for more than half a year:(
-> (I have ThinkPad X31 and have the same problem)
-> The intel people provided a solution for this problem and I committed
-> the patch against ACPI CA 20031029, but they implemented another
-> incomplete solution in 20031203, which is incompatible with the
-> previous one, so I had to drop the patch.
-> I've been aware that FreeBSD people are arguing in the acpi-jp list
-> and I planned to import their changes if it's proven to be stable.
Ah, I see that it's had a long and ugly history :-/
Anyway, Nate Lawson's patch does seem to make my machine happier in this
regard and AFAICS there have been no resulting regressions though since
this appears to be a refcount issue I can see how you'd want to make sure
it's well shaken out lest we subtly leak memory instead.
-> Sorry for the mess.
No problem at all; in fact it is I and the rest of the ACPI users who
should be thanking you for dealing with this messy stuff and getting
it all working.
Rafal Boni firstname.lastname@example.org
We are all worms. But I do believe I am a glowworm. -- Winston Churchill