On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:04:13AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 12:40:18AM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 09:09:49AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 12:35:13AM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > > > > The code to generate basic SSDT code isn't that difficult (see > > > > build_ssdt and src/ssdt-proc.dsl). Is there a compelling reason to > > > > patch the DSDT versus just generating the necessary blocks in an SSDT? > > > > > > I don't really care whether the code is in DSDT or SSDT, > > > IMO there isn't much difference between build_ssdt and patching: > > > main reason is build_ssdt uses offsets hardcoded to a specific binary > > > (ssdt_proc and SD_OFFSET_* ) while I used > > > a script to extract offsets. > > > > Yes - your script to extract the offsets is nice. > > If you still have doubts, > it might make sense to merge just patch 1 - > acpi: generate and parse mixed asl/aml listing > - as the first step. > With the infrastructure in place it will be > easier to discuss the best way to use it. I'm okay with your first patch. However, I wish to tag a release before committing ACPI changes. There was a concern raised with two-pass PCI initialization that I need to follow up on before tagging. -Kevin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
