On Friday 23 March 2012 21:54:12 Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 7:29 AM, Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> great. that is very good feature for development and debug.
Thanks.
...
> > + int table_nr = 0;
> > + *table_length = 0;
> > + *address = 0;
> > + for (; table_nr < ACPI_OVERRIDE_TABLES &&
> > + acpi_table_override_offset[table_nr]; table_nr++) {
> > + int table_offset;
> > + int table_len;
> > + struct acpi_table_header *table;
> > +
> > + if (table_nr == 0)
> > + table_offset = 0;
> > + else
> > + table_offset = acpi_table_override_offset[table_nr - 1];
> >
> > + table_len = acpi_table_override_offset[table_nr] - table_offset;
> > +
> > + table = acpi_os_map_memory(acpi_tables_inram + table_offset,
> > + table_len);
> > +
>
> maybe could have dmi checking for more strict checking.
I do not understand what should get checked?
Hm, I guess you mean if a general table is always added that is distributed
on different platforms and you want to white/blacklist machines to
explicitly load/not load the table?
This must not happen.
The tables are always platform specific and you provide tables for
a specific machine only for debugging purposes.
> also would help if have one boot command that could skip overriding.
Same. Both should not be needed.
Or you have a use-case in mind I cannot not think of...
Thomas
--
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
