4.14-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------ From: Erik Schmauss <erik.schma...@intel.com> commit 4abb951b73ff0a8a979113ef185651aa3c8da19b upstream. The table load process omitted adding the operation region address range to the global list. This omission is problematic because the OS queries the global list to check for address range conflicts before deciding which drivers to load. This commit may result in warning messages that look like the following: [ 7.871761] ACPI Warning: system_IO range 0x00000428-0x0000042F conflicts with op_region 0x00000400-0x0000047F (\PMIO) (20180531/utaddress-213) [ 7.871769] ACPI: If an ACPI driver is available for this device, you should use it instead of the native driver However, these messages do not signify regressions. It is a result of properly adding address ranges within the global address list. Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=200011 Tested-by: Jean-Marc Lenoir <archli...@jihemel.com> Signed-off-by: Erik Schmauss <erik.schma...@intel.com> Cc: All applicable <sta...@vger.kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> Cc: Jean Delvare <jdelv...@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> --- drivers/acpi/acpica/dsopcode.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/dsopcode.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/dsopcode.c @@ -451,6 +451,10 @@ acpi_ds_eval_region_operands(struct acpi ACPI_FORMAT_UINT64(obj_desc->region.address), obj_desc->region.length)); + status = acpi_ut_add_address_range(obj_desc->region.space_id, + obj_desc->region.address, + obj_desc->region.length, node); + /* Now the address and length are valid for this opregion */ obj_desc->region.flags |= AOPOBJ_DATA_VALID;
