Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 19:06:09 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: scott_long@btc.adaptec.com Cc: nate@root.org Subject: Re: FBSD 5.1b2 Inst. Results on Dell i8500 Message-ID: <20030522.190609.51301514.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <3ECD06CE.1090005@btc.adaptec.com> References: <20030522100612.X95471@root.org> <3ECD06CE.1090005@btc.adaptec.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <3ECD06CE.1090005@btc.adaptec.com>
Scott Long <scott_long@btc.adaptec.com> writes:
: Nate Lawson wrote:
: >>Your patch works wonderfully on my Dell 8200. What are the risks of the
: >>patch? I'd like to put it into 5.1 if possible.
: >
: >
: > No, please do not add this patch. It was authored by Mark Santcroos
: > <marks@ripe.net> and is a reduction in correctness. See this message
: > where the correct thing to do is to add RefOf() and DerefOf() to the ASL.
: >
: > http://home.jp.freebsd.org/cgi-bin/showmail/acpi-jp/2258
: >
: > -Nate
:
: Ok, thanks for the information. Unfortunately, the current ACPI drop
: has the appearance of being a bit of a regression for many people. If
: this implies that lots of ASL/AML out there is buggy, it still won't be
: very satisfying for users. What is an acceptable solution here?
I would tend to argue that the Microsoft interpreter constitutes a
de-facto standard which trumps the pedantically correct Intel approach
for their refrence implementation. It should be possible to turn on
'Microsoft bug compatibility mode' to allow for these things. It
isn't quite like a 'C' compiler where you can just tweak the source.
Tweaking ASL is a lot harder and would be very difficult to manage.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030522.190609.51301514.imp>