On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 09:42:43AM +0800, Lin Ming wrote: > On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 22:40 +0800, malattia@xxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:06:47PM +0000, Lin Ming wrote: ... > > > > Compilation complete. 0 Errors, 83 Warnings, 18 Remarks, 0 Optimizations > > > > ASL Input: MAIN.asl - 62 lines, 962044 bytes, 20265 keywords > > > > -AML Output: oconst.aml - 255557 bytes, 862 named objects, 19403 executable opcodes > > > > +AML Output: oconst.aml - 255575 bytes, 862 named objects, 19403 executable opcodes > > > > > > Why do the aml files have different size? > > > Is it caused by big/small endian? > > > > They should be identical, possibly my patch is incomplete or not > > correct. Out of the ~180 tests only the ones in the diff show > > differences. > > I'll have to check what is wrong on sparc64 for them. > > Hi, > > Did you find out why they are different? > > You can disassemble the aml files and see what the differences are. haven't had the time to go after it yet. apologies. But on a separate note, I assume there is interest in applying the patches to the upstream tree (at least once they are complete). Thanks! -- mattia :wq! -- 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
