Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:55:59 -0800
From:      Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        David Kelly <dkelly@hiwaay.net>, "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>, freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Worked in RELENG_5, fails in RELENG_6
Message-ID:  <438CDC7F.8030704@root.org>
In-Reply-To: <200511291739.00985.jhb@freebsd.org>
References:  <971FCB6690CD0E4898387DBF7552B90E03907B15@orsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com> <200511291739.00985.jhb@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 November 2005 05:26 pm, Moore, Robert wrote:
> 
>>FACS does not replace FADT. FACS is an ACPI 1.0 table as well.
> 
> 
> Ok, nevermind then, I misread things in the brief browsing I did of 
> CHANGES.txt in the ACPICA distribution.  Do you have any ideas why an older 
> version of ACPICA would accept his FACS, but the more recent versions are now 
> choking on it?  Did the in-kernel version not verify checksums on FACS until 
> recently?  It seems that acpidump has always reported that the table is 
> corrupt, even with the older ACPICA distribution.

RELENG_5 and 6 are the same versions of ACPICA.  Only 7-current has the 
newest dist.

-- 
Nate



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?438CDC7F.8030704>