Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 23:27:52 -0500 (CDT) From: John Utz <john@utzweb.net> To: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> Cc: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org>, <freebsd-mobile@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: is there a technical reason for apm or pnp to NOT be klds? Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204302326280.30730-100000@jupiter.linuxengine.net> In-Reply-To: <15567.27168.230527.88559@caddis.yogotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Nate Williams wrote: > > : 7. discover that apm isnt a KLD either. :-( > > : > > : 8. wonder why apm isnt a KLD... > > : > > : 9. decide to ask list. > > > > apm is hard to make a kld. There's a number of things that we do > > differently if apm is in the kernel, since apm is a known rogue when > > it comes to timing things. Since the clock attaches well before apm, > > it is hard to go back and retro-fit things to behave properly. With > > enough work, you might be able to pull it off. > > I believe John has a patch for APM that I promised to test a long time > ago that fixes much of this. Note, if APM didn't get loaded before > someone used the APM utility, bad things would happen, but this is no > worse than disabling APM. of the many freebsd hacking Johns in the world, of which do you speak? > > Nate > -- John L. Utz III john@utzweb.net Idiocy is the Impulse Function in the Convolution of Life To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-mobile" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.44.0204302326280.30730-100000>