From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 9 11:11:01 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B31E37B401; Fri, 9 May 2003 11:11:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0.freebsd-services.com (survey.codeburst.net [195.149.39.161]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EFCA43F3F; Fri, 9 May 2003 11:11:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from paul@freebsd-services.com) Received: from [192.168.7.2] (freebsd.gotadsl.co.uk [81.6.249.198]) by mx0.freebsd-services.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F20E31B211; Fri, 9 May 2003 19:10:58 +0100 (BST) From: Paul Richards To: John Baldwin In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Organization: FreeBSD Services Ltd Message-Id: <1052503582.619.89.camel@cf.freebsd-services.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4 Date: 09 May 2003 19:06:23 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: Peter Wemm Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/boot/i386/libi386 i386_module.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 May 2003 18:11:02 -0000 On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 18:49, John Baldwin wrote: > On 09-May-2003 Paul Richards wrote: > > On Fri, 2003-05-09 at 18:04, John Baldwin wrote: > >> On 09-May-2003 Paul Richards wrote: > >> > On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 10:25:37AM -0700, Peter Wemm wrote: > >> >> John Baldwin wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > On 30-Apr-2003 Peter Wemm wrote: > >> >> > > peter 2003/04/30 15:02:39 PDT > >> >> > > > >> >> > > FreeBSD src repository > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Modified files: > >> >> > > sys/boot/i386/libi386 i386_module.c > >> >> > > Log: > >> >> > > ACPI will always be present on AMD64 - it will never be an autodetect > >> >> > > module. > >> >> > > >> >> > I would require it in the kernel rather than load it as a module then. > >> >> > >> >> Exactly. But I was just getting annoyed with this warning during > >> >> development while I had it stubbed out. > >> > > >> > You might still want it as a module even if it's mandatory so that > >> > you can choose which version to load from the bootloader when your > >> > testing new versions. > >> > >> That would only work if the kernel linker supported that. At > >> the moment it doesn't. :) > > > > I don't follow, I do this all the time? > > > > or do you mean that having it mandatory would not work if it's also a > > module? > > Trying to kldload something that is already present in the kernel > either fails or results in a kernel panic. If you are already > rebooting to test it, then you might as well build a new kernel > as a new module each time. That's what I was getting at. I wouldn't like to see ACPI become a mandatory part of the static kernel since that would prevent it being loaded at boot time, and that's something I find useful. I'm happy that it me mandatory, in that the acpi functionality must always be present, but I'd still like to be able to put together my running kernel image by choosing which modules to link at boot time. It takes over 10 mins to build a kernel on my box so it's a lot quicker to rebuild the module and reboot than it is to wait for a complete kernel to build. -- Paul Richards FreeBSD Services Ltd