Hi! > > > Why would we end up with an overestimation if we check the I/O ports at > > > boot time? Do you have concrete cases in mind? > > > > ACPI will often describe large operation regions, but won't necessarily > > touch all of them. Effectively, every codepath would have to be walked > > through at boot time and checked for io access. > > Is there anything preventing us from doing such a walk and pre-allocate > all the I/O ranges? I am not familiar with the ACPI code at all, would > you possibly propose a patch doing that? ACPI AML is probably turing-complete: I'm afraid you are trying to solve the halting problem (-> impossible). Pavel > > If we can't do that, the overestimation approach might still work. I > wonder if it would cause problems in practice. If it does, we're back > to Pavel's AML lock. > > -- > Jean Delvare -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - 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
