On 06/26/17 23:01, John Pilkington wrote:
> A few weeks ago I started seeing error lines on a black screen at the start of the
> f25 boot process, but only recently have I found them in dmesg and examined them.
>
> [ 0.110117] ACPI BIOS Error (bug): \_SB.PCI0._OSC: Excess arguments - ASL
> declared 5, ACPI requires 4 (20170119/nsarguments-189)
>
> [ 0.110213] ACPI Error: [CAPD] Namespace lookup failure, AE_ALREADY_EXISTS
> (20170119/dsfield-211)
>
> [ 0.110262] ACPI Error: Method parse/execution failed [\_SB.PCI0._OSC] (Node
> ffff961f970b8820), AE_ALREADY_EXISTS (20170119/psparse-543)
>
> [ 0.110320] acpi PNP0A08:00: _OSC failed (AE_ALREADY_EXISTS); disabling ASPM
>
> [ 0.110329] acpi PNP0A08:00: [Firmware Info]: MMCONFIG for domain 0000 [bus
> 00-3f] only partially covers this bridge
>
> Their first appearance followed an MB battery change. Nothing seemed broken, and I
> took little notice. But now I see the date 20170119, which implies something in
> software. google found
>
>
https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/10/1232, 'PCI IRQ allocation broken' - with
> undesirable effects.
>
> That's linked to
>
>
https://bugzillakernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195319
>
> which is marked as a duplicate of BZ 195311 and closed.
I don't believe the date you are seeing is indicative of anything being wrong.
As a matter of fact, if you do a google search on nsarguments-189 or dsfield-211
you'll come up with a large number of finds such as this one
https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2199573 which has an entry dated January
17th, 2014 and a reference to 20131115/nsarguments-95. So, I suspect the date in
these messages are pointing to the date the module's code was last modified.
Thanks, Ed. Yes, I have seen much earlier reports similar to the first
line I quoted, which wasn't the focus of another recent thread here.
And I think I shall put Heinz's suggestion of compiling a vanilla kernel
on hold :-)