On Saturday 19 January 2008 4:03:39 am Frans Pop wrote:
> Dave Young wrote:
> > I noticed the port number changed to 40 in 2.6.24-rc8, but it's not
> > enough for me still.
>
> Same here, though the extreme noise has gone.
> From /proc/ioports and dmesg it looks like I'm short by either 1, or 3 :-(
Dave Young wrote:
> I noticed the port number changed to 40 in 2.6.24-rc8, but it's not
> enough for me still.
Same here, though the extreme noise has gone.
>From /proc/ioports and dmesg it looks like I'm short by either 1, or 3 :-(
Cheers,
FJP
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "uns
On 16-01-08 09:00, Rene Herman wrote:
On 16-01-08 06:55, Dave Young wrote:
I noticed the port number changed to 40 in 2.6.24-rc8, but it's not
enough for me still.
Yes, that's known. In .23 even more were (silently) ignored though.
Since .24-rc8 you should at least get just 1 warning (per r
On 16-01-08 06:55, Dave Young wrote:
I noticed the port number changed to 40 in 2.6.24-rc8, but it's not
enough for me still.
Yes, that's known. In .23 even more were (silently) ignored though. Since
.24-rc8 you should at least get just 1 warning (per resource type) and if
all's well .25 sho
);
> }
> @@ -192,6 +195,7 @@ static void pnpacpi_parse_allocated_dmaresource(struct
> pnp_resource_table *res,
> static void pnpacpi_parse_allocated_ioresource(struct pnp_resource_table
> *res,
>u64 io, u64 len, int io_decod
}
res->port_resource[i].start = io;
res->port_resource[i].end = io + len - 1;
- } else {
+ } else if (!warned++) {
printk(KERN_ERR "pnpacpi: exceeded the max number of IO "
Len Brown wrote:
>> > Well, yes, the warning is actually new as well. Previously your kernel
>> > just silently ignored 8 more mem resources than it does now it seems.
>> >
>> > Given that people are hitting these limits, it might make sense to just
>> > do away with the warning for 2.6.24 again w
> > Well, yes, the warning is actually new as well. Previously your kernel
> > just silently ignored 8 more mem resources than it does now it seems.
> >
> > Given that people are hitting these limits, it might make sense to just
> > do away with the warning for 2.6.24 again while waiting for th
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:07:28 +0800, Zhao Yakui said:
> The resources of PNP device are obtained by calling the _CRS method.
> Maybe some resources has been reserved. For example: Some system will
> reserve the following resources.
>BIOS-e820: fec0 - fed4 (reserved)
>
stem will report that some resources can't be reserved.
> I do not yet see how the "ioport range" messages increased from 0 to 16
> is explained, but I'm not too worried about that.
>
> > At the same time another problem maybe happens. If the number of
> > resou
ote:
> > On Mon, 2007-12-24 at 06:12 +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > > During boot with v2.6.24-rc6-125-g5356f66 on my Toshiba Satellite A40
> > > laptop, I suddenly get the following message (repeated 22 times!):
> > >pnpacpi: exceeded the max number of IO resources:
f66 on my Toshiba Satellite A40
> > laptop, I suddenly get the following message (repeated 22 times!):
> > pnpacpi: exceeded the max number of IO resources: 24
> >
> > Last time I tested 2.6.24 on that box was after the initial merge, but
> > before -rc1. Then those lines w
On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 13:39:04 MST, Bjorn Helgaas said:
> > -#define PNP_MAX_PORT 24
> > +#define PNP_MAX_PORT 128
> > #define PNP_MAX_MEM12
> > #define PNP_MAX_IRQ2
> > #define PNP_MAX_DMA2
>
> I don't think we can incr
On Monday 03 December 2007 06:15:40 pm Dave Young wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 08:55:13AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 18:02 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> > > On 30-11-07 23:22, Rene Herman wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 30-11-07 14:14, Chris Holvenstot wrote:
> > > >
> > >
On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 08:55:13AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 18:02 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> > On 30-11-07 23:22, Rene Herman wrote:
> >
> > > On 30-11-07 14:14, Chris Holvenstot wrote:
> > >
> > >> For what it is worth I too have seen this problem this morning and it
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 18:02 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 30-11-07 23:22, Rene Herman wrote:
>
> > On 30-11-07 14:14, Chris Holvenstot wrote:
> >
> >> For what it is worth I too have seen this problem this morning and it
> >> DOES appear to be new (in contrast to a previous comment)
> >>
> >> T
On Mon, 2007-12-03 at 18:02 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 30-11-07 23:22, Rene Herman wrote:
>
> > On 30-11-07 14:14, Chris Holvenstot wrote:
> >
> >> For what it is worth I too have seen this problem this morning and it
> >> DOES appear to be new (in contrast to a previous comment)
> >>
> >> T
On 30-11-07 23:22, Rene Herman wrote:
On 30-11-07 14:14, Chris Holvenstot wrote:
For what it is worth I too have seen this problem this morning and it
DOES appear to be new (in contrast to a previous comment)
The message: pnpacpi: exceeded the max number of mem resources: 12
is displayed ea
On 30-11-07 14:14, Chris Holvenstot wrote:
For what it is worth I too have seen this problem this morning and it
DOES appear to be new (in contrast to a previous comment)
The message: pnpacpi: exceeded the max number of mem resources: 12
is displayed each time the system is booted with the 2.
For what it is worth I too have seen this problem this morning and it
DOES appear to be new (in contrast to a previous comment)
The message: pnpacpi: exceeded the max number of mem resources: 12
is displayed each time the system is booted with the 2.6.24-rc3-git5
kernel but is NOT displayed when
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 01:40 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 10:21:28 +0800, Zhao Yakui said:
> > Thanks for the acpidump & dmesg.
> > In the acpidump there are so many IO resource definitions in the device
> > of mem2 and the number exceeds the predefined number(24).
>
>
On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 10:21:28 +0800, Zhao Yakui said:
> Thanks for the acpidump & dmesg.
> In the acpidump there are so many IO resource definitions in the device
> of mem2 and the number exceeds the predefined number(24).
On a semi-related note, I'm seeing 7 of these at each boot on a Dell L
On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 03:18 +0100, Rene Herman wrote:
> On 29-11-07 10:11, Dave Young wrote:
>
> > The pnpacpi rsparser.c report warnings of:
> > exceeded the max number of IO resources: 24
> >
> > dmesg|grep exceeded|wc
> > 66 5943564
>
> Heavens... (added CCs of people who just up
On 29-11-07 10:11, Dave Young wrote:
The pnpacpi rsparser.c report warnings of:
exceeded the max number of IO resources: 24
dmesg|grep exceeded|wc
66 5943564
Heavens... (added CCs of people who just upped it from 8 -- I suppose the
problem is not new then?)
Rene.
-
To unsubscr
Hi,
The pnpacpi rsparser.c report warnings of:
exceeded the max number of IO resources: 24
dmesg|grep exceeded|wc
66 5943564
Regards
dave
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at htt
25 matches
Mail list logo
