Zhao Yakui wrote: > On Tue, 2008-09-02 at 12:36 +0400, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > >>> In fact when EC timeout happens in interrupt mode, it indicates that >>> EC controller can't return response in time. >>> >> Wrong. Some EC controllers are "optimized" to not send interrupts for each confirmation. >> See history of EC patches for these optimization workarounds. >> > Maybe what you said is right. But in fact as is defined in ACPI spec, EC > controller should issue an interrupt according to the status of IBF and > OBF. More detailed info about EC interrupt model can be found in the > section 12.6.2 of ACPI 3.0b spec. > If some EC controller are "optimized" to not send interrupts, is it > appropriate to reject such bugs? > Not really. If it works on "The Other OS", it is a bug that it doesn't work on this one. That's a specific policy of the linux ACPI implementation. Given both the complexity and importance of ACPI I think it is the right policy. Alan -- 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
