On Sun, 30 Apr 2000, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 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.
The AML interpreter isn't required to be in the kernel for power
management (although I still think we might run into trouble if we send
devices to sleep using AML methods, as we don't currently reinitialize all
devices after acpid has started [for the full discussion, check out the
September 1999 archive at http://phobos.fs.tum.de/pipermail/acpi ]). For
configuration management, this is a different thing, since you need to
execute AML code in order to assign resources to devices. Since you don't
want to reassign resources after the system has booted (and this also
implies that you have access to the harddisks without ACPI enum, which may
not be true for future systems), you need the interpreter in the kernel.
Simon
-- PGP public key available from http://phobos.fs.tum.de/pgp/Simon.Richter.asc Fingerprint: 10 62 F6 F5 C0 5D 9E D8 47 05 1B 8A 22 E5 4E C1 Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!- 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