On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 6:19 PM Diogo Ivo <diogo.ivo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On 3/17/25 10:55 AM, Diogo Ivo wrote:
> > Intel Over-Clocking Watchdogs are described in ACPI tables by both the
> > generic PNP0C02 _CID and their ACPI _HID. The presence of the _CID then
> > causes the PNP scan handler to attach to the watchdog, preventing the
> > actual watchdog driver from binding. Address this by adding the ACPI
> > _HIDs to the list of non-PNP devices, so that the PNP scan handler is
> > bypassed.
> >
> > Note that these watchdogs can be described by multiple _HIDs for what
> > seems to be identical hardware. This commit is not a complete list of
> > all the possible watchdog ACPI _HIDs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Diogo Ivo <diogo.ivo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > v2->v3:
> > - Reword the commit message to clarify purpose of patch
> > ---
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/acpi_pnp.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_pnp.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_pnp.c
> > index 01abf26764b00c86f938dea2ed138424f041f880..3f5a1840f573303c71f5d579e32963a5b29d2587 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_pnp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_pnp.c
> > @@ -355,8 +355,10 @@ static bool acpi_pnp_match(const char *idstr, const struct acpi_device_id **matc
> > * device represented by it.
> > */
> > static const struct acpi_device_id acpi_nonpnp_device_ids[] = {
> > + {"INT3F0D"},
> > {"INTC1080"},
> > {"INTC1081"},
> > + {"INTC1099"},
> > {""},
> > };
> >
> >
>
> Gentle ping on this patch.
Do you want me to pick it up or do you want to route it through a
different tree?
