From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 9 01:35:58 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2201B1065674; Tue, 9 Mar 2010 01:35:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) From: Jung-uk Kim To: John Baldwin Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 20:35:42 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <201003081940.o28JeVG1088074@svn.freebsd.org> <201003081725.59267.jhb@freebsd.org> <201003081752.20087.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201003081752.20087.jkim@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201003082035.43977.jkim@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 X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 01:35:58 -0000 On Monday 08 March 2010 05:52 pm, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Monday 08 March 2010 05:25 pm, John Baldwin wrote: > > On Monday 08 March 2010 5:11:42 pm Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > > 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. > > > > It is different enough. Specifically, the amd64 one sets a > > "better" value for mp_maxid than i386, but it can only do this > > because it can run before SI_SUB_KLD since it is never invoked as > > a module. I still think that we should probably be moving away > > from acpi.ko rather than towards for other reasons. > > I noticed that and I used mptable instead, which seems to do well > enough for the job. Please keep in mind that I am not trying to > promote acpi.ko at all. I just want to make sure acpi.ko can be > built and loaded without builing and installing the whole > world/kernel for i386 to test new ACPICA. :-( > > Any way, I will just revert sys/modules/acpi/Makefile change, then. > It should be a reasonable compromise, deal? I thought you complained because I accidentally committed my local changes to sys/modules/acpi/Makefile. In fact, I didn't. :-) Do you still think I should back it out? Or is it okay? Jung-uk Kim