ACPI patches on test branch

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lenb/linux-acpi-2.6.git test

This test branch, which is pulled into linux-next and -mm, is a superset of the "release-2.6.27" branch.

test contains the additional following patches.

thanks,
-Len

From: Len Brown <[email protected]>

We should not get to acpi_walk_namespace and acpi_install_fixed_event_handler when acpi is disabled.

---
 drivers/acpi/events/evxface.c     |    2 ++
 drivers/acpi/namespace/nsxfeval.c |    2 ++
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

index 94a6efe..fcf0fb9 100644
@@ -114,6 +114,8 @@ acpi_install_fixed_event_handler(u32 event,
 
 	ACPI_FUNCTION_TRACE(acpi_install_fixed_event_handler);
 
+	WARN_ON(acpi_disabled);
+
 	/* Parameter validation */
 
 	if (event > ACPI_EVENT_MAX) {

index a8d5491..934c8fc 100644
@@ -391,6 +391,8 @@ acpi_walk_namespace(acpi_object_type type,
 
 	ACPI_FUNCTION_TRACE(acpi_walk_namespace);
 
+	WARN_ON(acpi_disabled);
+
 	/* Parameter validation */
 
 	if ((type > ACPI_TYPE_LOCAL_MAX) || (!max_depth) || (!user_function)) {

1.5.6.1.89.gd544

From: Len Brown <[email protected]>

In linux-2.6.27, we expect WARN() with printk semantics to become available, and we'll be able to simplify this code.

---
 drivers/acpi/utilities/utmisc.c |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

index 1f057b7..0a340b0 100644
@@ -1028,6 +1028,7 @@ acpi_ut_error(char *module_name, u32 line_number, char *format, ...)
 {
 	va_list args;
 
+	warn_on_slowpath(module_name, line_number);
 	acpi_os_printf("ACPI Error (%s-%04d): ", module_name, line_number);
 
 	va_start(args, format);

@@ -1042,6 +1043,7 @@ acpi_ut_exception(char *module_name,
 {
 	va_list args;
 
+	warn_on_slowpath(module_name, line_number);
 	acpi_os_printf("ACPI Exception (%s-%04d): %s, ", module_name,
 		       line_number, acpi_format_exception(status));
 

1.5.6.1.89.gd544

Len,

I just got a bunch of net/rfkill changes merged into -next through linux-wireless.

And I have a stack of thinkpad-acpi patches that depend on those, which I'd like to see in 2.6.27.

The thinkpad-acpi changes are being field-tested for more than a month now, not just by me, but also by the users of my thinkpad-acpi devel backports, and it is working fine.

So, how could we do it? Should I send the thinkpad-acpi patches to you guys now for review, and we merge them a bit late (after the rfkill work has already landed on mainline)?

  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh