From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jan 16 9:12:11 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F089037B401 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:12:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from poup.poupinou.org (poup.poupinou.org [195.101.94.96]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 508E143F75 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2003 09:12:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ducrot@poupinou.org) Received: from ducrot by poup.poupinou.org with local (Exim) id 18ZDYh-0000AQ-00 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2003 18:12:03 +0100 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 18:12:03 +0100 To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bad ACPL asl's on motherboards Message-ID: <20030116171203.GW12516@poup.poupinou.org> References: <98766849.1042697265@[192.168.1.20]> <20030116153535.GA46954@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030116153535.GA46954@dragon.nuxi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: Ducrot Bruno Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 07:35:35AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote: > On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 06:07:45AM -0800, Joel M. Baldwin wrote: > > I gather that there are quite a few Motherboards with bad ACPI asl's > > on them. I know that my Abit BP6 sure has problems. As a result I > > can't run ACPI. > > > > What are those of us with these motherboards supposed to to? > ... > > But this doesn't help me much since I don't know what corrections to > > make to the original asl file. Nor does it help the other people > > out there using BP6's. > > I'm convinced that if we are going to keep insisting that ACPI is enabled > by default, we need to gather the various fixed AML's and commit them to > the tree. I can't decide if they should be ports, or in /usr/src. > It sound like a good idea. However, there is a lot of isssues evolved. First, a DSDT table can and will be generated autmatically on the POST, because at least the memory controller can have different configurations depending on the total amount of the system memory than need to be reflected in the DSDT table. Second, even if this is ok, you have to consider that an OEM can have made modifications to their AML to correct some bugs and justifying a bios upgrade. You loose then those bug fixes. -- Ducrot Bruno -- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? -- Don't know. Don't care. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message