Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 06:46:46 +0900 From: Mitsuru IWASAKI <iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org> To: msmith@freebsd.org Cc: iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org, haro@tk.kubota.co.jp, takawata@shidahara1.planet.sci.kobe-u.ac.jp, current@freebsd.org, acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ACPI megapatch Message-ID: <20000930064646M.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200009292015.e8TKF6A06244@mass.osd.bsdi.com> References: <20000929220517P.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org> <200009292015.e8TKF6A06244@mass.osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, > > I prefer previous patch because most of the code in i386/acpi_machdep.c > > can be shared with IA64 I think. > > I'm not so sure about that. I suspect that the IA64 code is going to be > using the 'generic address' structures and the x-fields in eg. the FACT. > It won't be using the bios signature search either, or the int15 > interface. Realistically, the code in acpi_machdep.c is very simple.a > > I also think that if I'm going to continue to use a private identify > method to attach ACPI (IMO a good idea) then I want to keep its > implementation as separate from the 'generic' ACPI code as possible. The > pmap interface and one checksum routine is all that the current division > uses, and that's fairly clean. OK, understood. How about having MD sub-routine in the same interface (say acpi_set_resources() or acpi_create_instance() or whatever) for i386 and ia64? Then generic ACPI identify method calls suitable sub-routine depending on machine architecture. - i386/i386/acpi_machdep.c acpi_set_resources() (ex-acpiprobe_identify()) - ia64/ia64/acpi_machdep.c acpi_set_resources() - dev/acpi/acpi.c acpi_identify() this is quite simple, just do simple error checking and call acpi_set_resources() then return. Is this good for you too? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000930064646M.iwasaki>