[REGRESSION] ACPI: PCI: misleading _OSC failure message when _OSC is absent
From: KONDO KAZUMA(近藤 和真)
Date: Fri Jul 17 2026 - 08:02:05 EST
Hello,
After 7d703df7f4f5 ("ACPI: bus: Split _OSC evaluation out of acpi_run_osc()"),
AE_NOT_FOUND from acpi_evaluate_object() is handled as AE_ERROR in
negotiate_os_control().
I haven't yet observed any functional issue with this change,
but I started seeing the following misleading messages on my Intel servers:
kernel: ACPI: Enabled 2 GPEs in block 00 to 7F
kernel: ACPI: PCI Root Bridge [UNC0] (domain 0000 [bus fe])
kernel: acpi PNP0A03:00: _OSC: OS supports [ExtendedConfig ASPM ClockPM Segments MSI EDR HPX-Type3]
+ kernel: acpi PNP0A03:00: _OSC: OS requested [PCIeHotplug SHPCHotplug PME AER PCIeCapability LTR DPC]
+ kernel: acpi PNP0A03:00: _OSC: platform willing to grant [PCIeHotplug SHPCHotplug PME AER PCIeCapability LTR DPC]
+ kernel: acpi PNP0A03:00: _OSC: platform retains control of PCIe features (AE_ERROR)
kernel: PCI host bridge to bus 0000:fe
Before the commit, the log was:
kernel: ACPI: Enabled 2 GPEs in block 00 to 7F
kernel: ACPI: PCI Root Bridge [UNC0] (domain 0000 [bus fe])
kernel: acpi PNP0A03:00: _OSC: OS supports [ExtendedConfig ASPM ClockPM Segments MSI EDR HPX-Type3]
kernel: PCI host bridge to bus 0000:fe
"UNC0" is an uncore root bridge and does not define an _OSC method in the ACPI
namespace on my systems.
Previously, when acpi_evaluate_object() was called for UNC0._OSC, it returned
AE_NOT_FOUND, and that status was propagated to negotiate_os_control().
Now, it appears that acpi_eval_osc()/acpi_run_osc() no longer preserve the
distinction between AE_NOT_FOUND and other errors from acpi_evaluate_object(),
so negotiate_os_control() no longer receives AE_NOT_FOUND in this case.
The call chain looks like this on my system:
negotiate_os_control()
acpi_pci_osc_control_set() [retval = AE_ERROR ]
acpi_pci_query_osc () [retval = AE_ERROR ]
acpi_pci_run_osc() [retval = AE_ERROR ]
acpi_run_osc() [retval = AE_ERROR ]
acpi_eval_osc() [retval = -ENODATA ]
acpi_evaluate_object() [retval = AE_NOT_FOUND]
As a result, negotiate_os_control() logs messages as if the OS had negotiated
with the platform via _OSC, even though _OSC is absent and no such negotiation
actually happens.
I'm not very familiar with the ACPI/PCI code, so I may be missing some
context. However, if my understanding is correct, would preserving
AE_NOT_FOUND here (for example, having acpi_eval_osc()/acpi_run_osc() return
the error as-is) be the right direction, or should the message handling be
adjusted instead?
If there is a preferred direction for fixing this, I would be happy to try
putting together a patch and testing it on my system.
Thanks,
Kazuma