Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 17:11:42 -0500 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r204877 - head/sys/modules/acpi/acpi Message-ID: <201003081712.00635.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201003081611.42854.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201003081940.o28JeVG1088074@svn.freebsd.org> <201003081611.42854.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 08 March 2010 04:11 pm, John Baldwin wrote: > On Monday 08 March 2010 2:40:31 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > Author: jkim > > Date: Mon Mar 8 19:40:31 2010 > > New Revision: 204877 > > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/204877 > > > > Log: > > Enable ACPI module build on amd64. Although we strongly > > recommend building it into kernel, there is no need to prevent it > > from building at all. > > (Oops, ignore previous spurious reply). > > Please revert this. The MADT parser on amd64 is slightly different > from i386 and will not work when acpi is loaded as a module. If > anything, I would prefer we make acpi not be a module on i386. > There are several things that would be far less invasive to > implement via #ifdef DEV_ACPI than by defining runtime kobj > interfaces to the ACPI driver. madt.c itself is not very different but I understand what you are trying to explain here. In fact, I tested it before committing and the trick was adding mptable in place of acpi. It worked fine although it may not be ideal. I can back out sys/modules/acpi/Makefile change if you agree, however. Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201003081712.00635.jkim>