Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 23:50:33 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@freebsd.org> Cc: "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>, freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com> Subject: Re: MacBookPro 5,1 Message-ID: <4CD087A9.4000809@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201011021650.22657.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <201010121209.06397.hselasky@c2i.net> <201011021614.07631.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <201011021624.38882.jhb@freebsd.org> <201011021650.22657.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 02/11/2010 22:50 Jung-uk Kim said the following: > Yes, I understand. However, ACPICA is expecting the same size of > buffer *including* the optional parts if I am reading the code right. Hmm, where is ACPICA doing that? I didn't see any connection between what *ACPICA* can return to OS in _CRS/_PRS and what OS can pass in _SRS. > Besides, I don't think there is any harm in doing the right > thing. ;-) I don't think that this is any "righter" than zero-ing out resource source description string. BIOS/firmware can't possibly use that for anything meaningful, IMO. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CD087A9.4000809>