[PATCH v1] ACPI: bus: Avoid confusing complaints regarding missing _OSC features

From: Rafael J. Wysocki

Date: Wed Jul 22 2026 - 09:05:26 EST


On Tuesday, July 21, 2026 9:29:14 PM CEST Saverio Miroddi wrote:
> The ACPI specification defines OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR to mean that
> firmware cleared capability bits requested by the operating system. Some
> firmware sets this status during the control request while returning every
> requested capability unchanged. On the affected system, the requested and
> returned masks were both 0x006a7eff.
>
> Commit e5322888e6bf ("ACPI: bus: Rework the handling of \_SB._OSC
> platform features") made all control-response errors produce error-level
> messages. Consequently, the inconsistent response above now claims that
> features may be missing even though none were removed.
>
> Track whether the response actually clears a requested bit and omit the
> error-level messages only if OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR is the sole
> error and no capability was cleared. Keep the dynamic-debug diagnostic and
> leave the negotiated capability mask and all other error cases unchanged.
>
> Fixes: e5322888e6bf ("ACPI: bus: Rework the handling of \_SB._OSC platform features")
> Signed-off-by: Saverio Miroddi <saverio.pub2@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/bus.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> index a30a904f6535..c13128cbc2f6 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> @@ -335,7 +335,8 @@ static int acpi_osc_handshake(acpi_handle handle, const char *uuid_str,
> .length = bufsize * sizeof(u32),
> };
> struct acpi_buffer output;
> - u32 *retbuf, test;
> + u32 *retbuf, test, errors;
> + bool capabilities_masked = false;

The existing test variable can be used for this just fine, no need to add more
of them.

> guid_t guid;
> int ret, i;
>
> @@ -395,16 +396,24 @@ static int acpi_osc_handshake(acpi_handle handle, const char *uuid_str,
> * Clear the feature bits in capbuf[] that have not been acknowledged.
> * After that, capbuf[] contains the resultant feature mask.
> */
> - for (i = OSC_QUERY_DWORD + 1; i < bufsize; i++)
> + for (i = OSC_QUERY_DWORD + 1; i < bufsize; i++) {
> + if (capbuf[i] & ~retbuf[i])
> + capabilities_masked = true;
> +
> capbuf[i] &= retbuf[i];
> + }
>
> - if (retbuf[OSC_QUERY_DWORD] & OSC_ERROR_MASK) {
> + errors = retbuf[OSC_QUERY_DWORD] & OSC_ERROR_MASK;
> + if (errors) {
> /*
> - * Complain about the unexpected errors and print diagnostic
> - * information related to them.
> + * Some firmware sets OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR without clearing
> + * any requested capability. Only complain if another error is
> + * present or a capability was actually masked.
> */
> - acpi_handle_err(handle, "_OSC: errors while processing control request\n");
> - acpi_handle_err(handle, "_OSC: some features may be missing\n");
> + if (errors != OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR || capabilities_masked) {
> + acpi_handle_err(handle, "_OSC: errors while processing control request\n");
> + acpi_handle_err(handle, "_OSC: some features may be missing\n");
> + }
> acpi_osc_error_check(handle, &guid, rev, &cap, retbuf);

And here the debug output is not quite useful if the error is essentially
ignored.

> }

So below is my version of this fix, please check it if works for you.

Thanks!

---
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [PATCH] ACPI: bus: Avoid confusing complaints regarding missing _OSC features

The platform firmware on some platforms sets OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR
in _OSC error bits even though it actually acknowledges all of the
requested features which after commit e5322888e6bf ("ACPI: bus: Rework
the handling of \_SB._OSC platform features") causes the kernel to
complain unnecessarily.

Avoid the confusing complaints by explicitly checking for that case
in acpi_osc_handshake().

Fixes: e5322888e6bf ("ACPI: bus: Rework the handling of \_SB._OSC platform features")
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/acpi/bus.c | 12 ++++++++++--
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
@@ -395,10 +395,18 @@ static int acpi_osc_handshake(acpi_handl
* Clear the feature bits in capbuf[] that have not been acknowledged.
* After that, capbuf[] contains the resultant feature mask.
*/
- for (i = OSC_QUERY_DWORD + 1; i < bufsize; i++)
+ for (i = OSC_QUERY_DWORD + 1, test = 0; i < bufsize; i++) {
+ test |= capbuf[i] & ~retbuf[i];
capbuf[i] &= retbuf[i];
+ }

- if (retbuf[OSC_QUERY_DWORD] & OSC_ERROR_MASK) {
+ /*
+ * Some platforms set OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR even though they
+ * acknowledge all of the requested features, so avoid complaining in
+ * those cases unless any other error bits are also set.
+ */
+ if ((retbuf[OSC_QUERY_DWORD] & OSC_ERROR_MASK) &&
+ (test || retbuf[OSC_QUERY_DWORD] != OSC_CAPABILITIES_MASK_ERROR)) {
/*
* Complain about the unexpected errors and print diagnostic
* information related to them.