Brown, Len wrote: >>I have a situation where I need to get an ACPI device. The PNP system >>seems like the way to go for this, but I need some extra objects from >>the ACPI namespace for this device (_IFT and _SRV to be specific, >>supposidly added in ACPI 3.0). There doesn't seem to be a clean way to >>do this right now. What would be the best way to get these? >> >> > >If your code knows about specific AML methods, then it is by-definition, >ACPI-aware, and can't be hidden (completely) behind PNP. > > True, but the PNP stuff does a lot of the work :) >Either that, or some ACPI-aware code needs to exist to intervene to >allow your code to know know anything about ACPI. > > I was thinking of some way to determine if it is ACPI and get the handle, or a new call to get resources. >So you could make it ACPI aware like 8250_acpi.c was, before it was >deleted... > > So just use ACPI directly. This will bypass the PNP port reservation for that particular ACPI device, I assume. Thanks, -Corey - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
