No ACPI discussion can be complete without mentioning Microsoft and Microsoft compatibility -- Windows does not fully support ACPI 2.0 to this day, even though it was released in the year 2000, and ACPI 3.0 has been out since 2004. > -----Original Message----- > From: Alexey Starikovskiy [mailto:alexey.y.starikovskiy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 9:35 AM > To: Jean Delvare > Cc: Pavel Machek; Moore, Robert; Matthew Garrett; Chuck Ebbert; Rudolf > Marek; linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel; lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] Could the k8temp driver be interfering with > ACPI? > > Jean Delvare wrote: > > Hi Alexey, > > > > On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 13:39:33 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > > > >> Jean Delvare wrote: > >> > >>> I can only second Pavel's wish here. This would be highly convenient > >>> for OS developers to at least know which resources are accessed by AML > >>> and SMM. Without this information, we can never be sure that OS-level > >>> code won't conflict with ACPI or SMM. > >>> > >> BIOS vendors are not required to support latest and greatest ACPI spec. > >> So even if some future spec version > >> will include this ports description, we will still have majority of > >> hardware not exporting it... > >> > > > > Your reasoning is amazing. So we should refrain from proposing any > > improvement which we aren't certain 100% of the systems will support > > tomorrow? Then let's all stay away from our keyboards forever, as the > > evolution of computer technology is based on exactly that - > > improvements which not all systems implement. > > > > It's friday evening, let's have some more for fun. With a similar > > logic, ten years ago we'd have come up with the following conclusions: > > > > The majority of computers have a single CPU, there is no point in > > adding SMP support to Linux. > > > > Let's not add a new instruction set in our next CPU family. The > > majority of systems will not implement it so it will be useless anyway. > > > > There's no point in supporting PnP in Linux, there are a majority of > > legacy ISA cards out there which do not support it anyway! > > > > See my point? Just because not every hardware out there supports a > > given standard doesn't make that standard necessarily useless. > > > > Just make the next version of ACPI better than the previous one (not > > necessarily a challenge) and everyone will embrace it. > > > > > You get me wrong, I'm not against the proposal, so keep your breath. > I'm just saying that you get old waiting for BIOS vendors to export this > info, even if it's in spec. > > Regards, > Alex. - 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
