Re: acpi4asus

[Bill Davidsen]

Pavel Machek wrote:

> Hi!
>
>  
>
> > > I am far from qualified to comment on this, but from a 
> > > users point of view, is it possible to not have laptop 
> > > specific code in the kernel?
> > > I have had two Linux laptops and with both I had ACPI 
> > > issues.
> > > The vendors of both laptops (Toshiba Tecra S1 and now 
> > > an Asus W3V) don't seem to be following standards. With 
> > > both I seem to need to patch ACPI to get various 
> > > functions of the laptop to work.
> > > I would love to see laptop specific functionality 
> > > definitions exist outside the kernel.
> > >
> > >      
> > I don't think that forcing laptop users to have their 
> > own code outside the kernel is really the best approach 
> > for either the developers or the users. Most users will 
> >    
>
> No, we don't want that. But we do not want ibm-acpi, toshiba-acpi,
> asus-acpi, etc, when they really only differ in string constants used.
>
> We want userland to tell kernel 'mail led is controlled by AML routine
> foo', instead of having gazillion *-acpi modules.
>
>
>  
I see no reason why an interface to that couldn't be included in the 
kernel, with just a small table for each hardware instead of a whole 
module. Kind of a white list with detail.

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
 CTO TMR Associates, Inc
 Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/