From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jun 16 21:21:42 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD8816A4CE
	for <acpi@freebsd.org>; Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:21:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.village.org [168.103.84.182])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D42D843D39
	for <acpi@freebsd.org>; Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:21:41 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i5GLJx3w025475;
	Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:19:59 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 15:20:14 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20040616.152014.32124821.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: robert.moore@intel.com
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <37F890616C995246BE76B3E6B2DBE055011BA135@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com>
References: <37F890616C995246BE76B3E6B2DBE055011BA135@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: acpi@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: apm problem
X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: ACPI and power management development <freebsd-acpi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-acpi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:21:42 -0000

In message: <37F890616C995246BE76B3E6B2DBE055011BA135@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com>
            "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com> writes:
: This entire discussion reminds me why I've always felt that signed
: integers and system software don't mix.
: 
: :-)

I'd usually agree with that, but there are times that a signed number
is better than an unsigned one.  You can make the same kinds of errors
with a negative number passed as unsigned as you can with an unsigned
number passed as signed....

Warner