From patchwork Mon Aug 26 23:34:37 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: David Wang <00107082@163.com> X-Patchwork-Id: 13778668 Received: from m16.mail.163.com (m16.mail.163.com [117.135.210.4]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1656A7DA92; Mon, 26 Aug 2024 23:35:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=117.135.210.4 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724715321; cv=none; b=L65BUHMPNAZStAbWrVvR0AIqkBZj7XIhE05btGVTPM4zjs1b3FtPk3UxxQgZG9BBEntc1ctES2BS7HQBQUi6iCI1n5eunJpLGBQTux/cKP7MRHqlEnjlcCkh0DZNaL1JaipFIutIewS2Su4Jjryg4rz9YkMmaA9OtEMlSPLPUUg= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724715321; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jvRskkPp2UNFxuSs1KmGXQf0+zNARsdAbtFaKe6i0GI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; b=kX0nzwowcmJY2n7dXYT600SIY2yjcx/68hwbHH0SYJht+VifaeJ06DHzDxY8gZLebLbuLJqxaGb9Gna5lMM3NKWLoobkxrWNLN4z7+jp1ZGyk1cqw7UiR6Tm8Dx6mxPpaV7FEhW6/Ea9brCzVJdbwQ1N+Uftf+N06pj8xjxSx3M= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=163.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=163.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=163.com header.i=@163.com header.b=FrTYElyo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=117.135.210.4 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=163.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=163.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=163.com header.i=@163.com header.b="FrTYElyo" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=163.com; s=s110527; h=From:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; bh=zx3Z/ skLD261Grlw5va5uoZD4LvrxeLByUbYg6lWgtU=; b=FrTYElyo2rpbMUQqRWiTB Z609ncu8uVzAsZrfFO8JidRvEvK6yRuS5UUZnuwLuVAV3ibun1z8e8bGo8ca0166 7tQh6O0UI9T83gmE1as9a7ZjNGdc7HZ++mJJ4xyn2FKsge68h/eOgfn7y9fyI87Q P0/yAkN/b2oBhnc1OQHd7g= Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [111.35.190.113]) by gzga-smtp-mta-g3-4 (Coremail) with SMTP id _____wD3H6oQEc1mo37+Ag--.52917S4; Tue, 27 Aug 2024 07:34:57 +0800 (CST) From: David Wang <00107082@163.com> To: rafael@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Wang <00107082@163.com> Subject: [PATCH] acpi/_DSM: Add rev/func to warning message when acpi_evaluate_dsm failed. Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 07:34:37 +0800 Message-Id: <20240826233437.19632-1-00107082@163.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CM-TRANSID: _____wD3H6oQEc1mo37+Ag--.52917S4 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uf129KBjvJXoW7tFWxCw45Zw4kAw45uF4rKrg_yoW8Kw45pF y7Zr4jkrZrAayUtwn7t3yxKw1S9a9xW39I9w4xGFyUX34DWrn29rW5GrnFyayDAw17Xa45 Z3W2qF1jgr4kZr7anT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDUYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x0pE1vVZUUUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: qqqrilqqysqiywtou0bp/1tbiMxBHqmXAnb6sJQABsA When acpi_evaluate_dsm failed, the warning message lacks the rev and func information which is available and helpful. For example, iwlwifi would make _DSM queries for lari config, and when it failed, all warning messages are all the same: ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade (0x1001) With this patch, the warnings would be more informative: ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade rev:0 func:1 (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade rev:0 func:6 (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade rev:0 func:7 (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade rev:0 func:8 (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade rev:0 func:3 (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade rev:0 func:9 (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade rev:0 func:10 (0x1001) ACPI: \: failed to evaluate _DSM bf0212f2-788f-c64d-a5b3-1f738e285ade rev:0 func:12 (0x1001) Signed-off-by: David Wang <00107082@163.com> --- drivers/acpi/utils.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/acpi/utils.c b/drivers/acpi/utils.c index ae9384282273..6de542d99518 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/utils.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/utils.c @@ -801,7 +801,8 @@ acpi_evaluate_dsm(acpi_handle handle, const guid_t *guid, u64 rev, u64 func, if (ret != AE_NOT_FOUND) acpi_handle_warn(handle, - "failed to evaluate _DSM %pUb (0x%x)\n", guid, ret); + "failed to evaluate _DSM %pUb rev:%lld func:%lld (0x%x)\n", + guid, rev, func, ret); return NULL; }