Bug 455253 - [4.7] /proc/acpi/dsdt: No such device
[4.7] /proc/acpi/dsdt: No such device
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kernel (Show other bugs)
ia64 Linux
low Severity low
: rc
: ---
Assigned To: Prarit Bhargava
Martin Jenner
Depends On:
Blocks: 461304
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2008-07-14 09:59 EDT by CAI Qian
Modified: 2009-05-18 15:37 EDT (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2009-05-18 15:37:16 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
ia64 workaround for this issue (3.73 KB, patch)
2008-07-28 08:30 EDT, Prarit Bhargava
no flags Details | Diff

  None (edit)
Description CAI Qian 2008-07-14 09:59:07 EDT
Description of problem:
I have seen two HP IA64 machines,


failed to read /proc/acpi/dsdt: No such device. There is no such problem on
RHEL5-U2 Kernel though.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Both 4.7 and 4.6.z Kernel,

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
cat /proc/acpi/dsdt
Actual results:
No such device

Expected results:
Display some content.
Comment 1 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-27 18:11:10 EDT
What appears to be happening is that the ACPI code attempts to reserve 128K+
memory for the dsdt table.  

a) I don't know if the calculation for the dsdt is correct in RHEL4, and b) I'm
going to load RHEL5 (which works) to see if the same size reservation is made.

I asked lwoodman (in private email) about this and he did say that the upper
limit of kmalloc in RHEL4 is 128K.

Comment 2 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-27 18:54:38 EDT
>a) I don't know if the calculation for the dsdt is correct in RHEL4, and b) I'm
>going to load RHEL5 (which works) to see if the same size reservation is made.

dsdt size is 0x226a5 on both RHEL4 & RHEL5.  The problem here is that RHEL4 has
a 128K limit on kmalloc.  The code in question should use alloc_pages() to avoid
this bug.

Comment 3 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-28 07:03:38 EDT
After thinking about this, I'm curious as to why the dsdt size is 0x226a5. 
Maybe that's a BIOS/ACPI Table error?  To make matters worse, it is alloc'd many
times during a 'cat /proc/acpi/dsdt' ...

Comment 4 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-28 07:04:04 EDT
Doug -- comment #3?

Comment 5 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-28 08:30:42 EDT
Created attachment 312765 [details]
ia64 workaround for this issue
Comment 6 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-28 09:04:09 EDT
Adding Alex and Tony -- HP engineers.  Do you know if the dsdt is supposed to be
that large on these systems?

Comment 7 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-28 09:25:59 EDT
Taking out of NEEDINFO.  I downloaded acpidump, compiled, and ran it on
matterhorn1.  AFAICT, it looks like the table is valid.

Comment 8 Tony Camuso 2008-07-28 10:49:36 EDT

Can you find the DSDT in the ACPI dump?

If so, bytes 7:4 give the length of the table. 

That is the amount of space that should be allocated. 
Comment 9 Prarit Bhargava 2008-07-28 11:18:04 EDT
Hi Tony, yup I found that using the acpidump utility.  The amount there
corresponds to what is being allocated -- and the table looks fine, IMO.  So I
posted the patch to RHKL.

Comment 10 Tony Camuso 2008-08-13 15:29:33 EDT

Since you've posted the patch, I assume that this problem has been solved and we can close this BZ. Correct?
Comment 11 Prarit Bhargava 2008-08-13 15:35:26 EDT
Hi Tony,

This BZ is in POST -- where it should be for now.  dzickus will move it into MODIFIED, and eventually it will be CLOSED NEXTRELEASE.

ie) leave it in POST.

Comment 12 Tony Camuso 2008-08-13 15:55:42 EDT
Thanks, Prarit. 

Just doing a little housekeeping. 
Comment 13 RHEL Product and Program Management 2008-09-03 09:16:49 EDT
Updating PM score.
Comment 14 CAI Qian 2008-09-28 05:45:43 EDT
It might be interesting to check this bug,
bug 464406 -  [4.7.z] SGI Altix ACPI Problem .
Comment 15 CAI Qian 2008-12-29 01:14:45 EST
The machine hp-rx8640-03.rhts.bos.redhat.com is also affected.
Comment 16 Vivek Goyal 2009-01-15 09:03:48 EST
Committed in 78.29.EL . RPMS are available at http://people.redhat.com/vgoyal/rhel4/
Comment 20 errata-xmlrpc 2009-05-18 15:37:16 EDT
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.