From owner-freebsd-current Fri Jan 17 16:11:41 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 DCBB737B401 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:11:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail12.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.212]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 202BD43F43 for ; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:11:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 26965 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2003 00:11:46 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender ) by mail12.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 18 Jan 2003 00:11:46 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0I0BYUT019808; Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:11:35 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.2 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3E289379.6473C66A@mindspring.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:11:34 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: Terry Lambert Subject: Re: bad ACPL asl's on motherboards Cc: Nate Lawson , freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG 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 17-Jan-2003 Terry Lambert wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: >> > For Intel, this is a win-win. >> > >> > For FreeBSD, unless Windows adopts the same code (which it will >> > not do, since doing so will limit their market, just as using >> > the code is currently limiting FreeBSD's market), it's a lose-lose. >> >> Are you offering to write a new ACPI parser? If not, then put up or >> shut up. It's not exactly a trivial task. > > This was in the context of a discussion about what could be > done about the problem. It's really the original poster > you should be asking to write code. That's basically what > I was doing (asking him to write the code) by posting the > list of available options. > > I was under the impression that the Intel ACPI parser was > source code? > > So what we're really talking about here is taking over the > maintenance of, and forking, the Intel code, unless you think > Microsoft wrote their code from scratch... I do think M$ wrote their code from scratch prior to the existence of the Intel ACPICA code. > In any case, for anything for which there is a specification, > was long as the specification is complete, implementation is > really pretty trivial. Haha, you are full of it if you say that. The _exact_ problem here is that M$'s ACPI interpreter is buggy and _doesn't_ follow the spec, and so BIOS writer's have hacked their AML's to work around the bugs in M$ interpreter. Thus, if you were to write an interpreter _to the spec_, you end up with what Intel has, and certain machines don't work with it. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message