| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
If any path in a method returns a value, IASL expects that all paths
within that method will return a value.
Presumably, the ATPX would not need a return value if Arg0 is anything
other than 0, so just return a zero.
- Serialize ATPX method to make IASL happy. This means that it can
only be used by one thread at a time.
Fixes these issues:
dsdt.aml 2581: Method (ATPX, 2, NotSerialized) {
Remark 2120 - ^ Control Method should be made Serialized
(due to creation of named objects within)
dsdt.aml 2581: Method (ATPX, 2, NotSerialized) {
Warning 3115 - ^ Not all control paths return a value (ATPX)
Change-Id: I14aeab0cebe4596e06a17cffc36cc01b953d7191
Signed-off-by: Martin Roth <martinroth@google.com>
Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/12518
Reviewed-by: Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineeringinc.com>
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Stefan Reinauer <stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org>
|
|
It encourages users from writing to the FSF without giving an address.
Linux also prefers to drop that and their checkpatch.pl (that we
imported) looks out for that.
This is the result of util/scripts/no-fsf-addresses.sh with no further
editing.
Change-Id: Ie96faea295fe001911d77dbc51e9a6789558fbd6
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/11888
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Ronald G. Minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
|
|
Follow up for commit b890a12, some contributions brought
back a number of FSF addresses, so get rid of them again.
Change-Id: Icf83d5e2a3daea385af3572e9eac6b2431652c28
Signed-off-by: Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@chromium.org>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/10640
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Reviewed-by: Paul Menzel <paulepanter@users.sourceforge.net>
Reviewed-by: Kyösti Mälkki <kyosti.malkki@gmail.com>
|
|
Change-Id: I9b86ebec59ccb63db0e1ba61533d162507a22379
Signed-off-by: Timothy Pearson <tpearson@raptorengineeringinc.com>
Reviewed-on: http://review.coreboot.org/9320
Tested-by: build bot (Jenkins)
Tested-by: Raptor Engineering Automated Test Stand <noreply@raptorengineeringinc.com>
Reviewed-by: Edward O'Callaghan <edward.ocallaghan@koparo.com>
|
