Simon Richter wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Apr 2000, Cesar Eduardo Barros wrote:
>
> > acpid (as far as I know at least) is like apmd but also parses the
> > ACPI tables (easy to do within a boot script, at the same spot acpid
> > would be loaded).
>
> acpid does more than table parsing, so it cannot be easily replaced by a
> "boot script". Most of its functionality (table parsing, AML code
> execution) will move into the kernel later on, as future systems will
> depend on that for hardware enumeration, but for now having a separate
> daemon eases development.
After having re-read the ACPI spec a few days ago, I agree that more
ACPI stuff is gonna wind up in the kernel. We don't want to have to
bounce back to userspace just to parse tables which tell us key things
like APIC or CPU info.
(fwiw here is a kernel traffic reference for ACPI:
http://kt.linuxcare.com/kernel-traffic/kt19991004_37.epl#1 )
Parsing tables is way different from parsing AML. Why does there need
to be an AML parser in the kernel? It seems like Andy adequate
responded to your list of drawbacks at the above link, so I hope you
mind my request for a clarification of the issue.
Thanks,
Jeff
-- Jeff Garzik | Nothing cures insomnia like the Building 1024 | realization that it's time to get up. MandrakeSoft, Inc. | -- random fortune- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 21:00:18 EST