Re: [PATCH v3] ACPI: scan: Avoid registering platform devices with resource overlaps

On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 09:00:09PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel) wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 7:32 PM Nathan Chancellor <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 03:55:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > And below is one to try.
> > >
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c |    7 ++++++-
> > >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
> > > @@ -85,7 +85,12 @@ static unsigned int acpi_platform_adjust
> > >       for (i = 0; i < count; ) {
> > >               struct resource *res = &resources[i];
> > >
> > > -             if (resource_type(new_res) != resource_type(res) ||
> > > +             /*
> > > +              * Look for overlaps of resources of the same type that
> > > +              * would cause resource insertion to fail.
> > > +              */
> > > +             if (__resource_contains_unbound(new_res, res) ||
> > > +                 resource_type(new_res) != resource_type(res) ||
> > >                   !resource_union(new_res, res, new_res)) {
> > >                       i++;
> > >                       continue;
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > This does not appear to resolve the probe failure for me.
> 
> So can you please try to reverse new_res and res in the
> __resource_contains_unbound() check in the patch and try again?

Can confirm that

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
index fffdd4f011b2..ea3b2e03ebae 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c
@@ -85,7 +85,12 @@ static unsigned int acpi_platform_adjust_resources(struct acpi_device *adev,
 	for (i = 0; i < count; ) {
 		struct resource *res = &resources[i];
 
-		if (resource_type(new_res) != resource_type(res) ||
+		/*
+		 * Look for overlaps of resources of the same type that
+		 * would cause resource insertion to fail.
+		 */
+		if (__resource_contains_unbound(res, new_res) ||
+		    resource_type(new_res) != resource_type(res) ||
 		    !resource_union(new_res, res, new_res)) {
 			i++;
 			continue;
--

resolves the probe failure for me.

-- 
Cheers,
Nathan