Hi Alex-san,
On my machine, it is legal to evaluate S1F0._SUN independent of S1F0._STA because L001._INI has already been evaluated. It would be helpful to know what Fujitsu's namespace looks like. If Fujitsu slot objects contain _STA and _INI, then I agree with Kenji-san -- I definitely need to check _STA before evaluating _SUN.
Thank you for explanation. Maybe I understood the summary of implementation of HP firmware. But how to use or where to put _INI method in the ACPI namespace never becomes reasonable reason why your driver may ignore _STA before evaluating _SUN.
But in any case, I think both HP and Fujitsu firmware are doing legal things -- neither firmware is breaking the spec.
My understanding of your explanation so far is: - evaluating _SUN without checking _STA doesn't cause problem, from the view point of HP's implementation. - some IBM machine is doing same as HP I never think those are reasonable reasons why ignoring _STA before evaluating _SUN is legal. Am I missing something?
If one list is shorter than the other, then that should be the list to put in the kernel, and the default behavior should be "majority rule".
I don't want to consider "majority rule" before I understand why ignoring _STA is legal. Thanks, Kenji Kaneshige -- 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
