From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 22 18:06:41 2003 Return-Path: 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 CC2B837B401 for ; Thu, 22 May 2003 18:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 171F243F93 for ; Thu, 22 May 2003 18:06:41 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.12.8/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h4N16ckA023978; Thu, 22 May 2003 19:06:38 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Date: Thu, 22 May 2003 19:06:09 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <20030522.190609.51301514.imp@bsdimp.com> To: scott_long@btc.adaptec.com From: "M. Warner Losh" In-Reply-To: <3ECD06CE.1090005@btc.adaptec.com> References: <20030522100612.X95471@root.org> <3ECD06CE.1090005@btc.adaptec.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: current@freebsd.org cc: nate@root.org Subject: Re: FBSD 5.1b2 Inst. Results on Dell i8500 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 01:06:42 -0000 In message: <3ECD06CE.1090005@btc.adaptec.com> Scott Long 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 : > 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