We've tried to be very careful about not including compiler-only code into kernel code. I'm not entirely sure why patches 1,2, and 3 are applied against Linux. Perhaps Ming can answer this, or I'll take a look at the patches. Bob > -----Original Message----- > From: Len Brown [mailto:lenb417@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Len Brown > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 8:57 AM > To: Lin, Ming M > Cc: Moore, Robert; linux-acpi > Subject: Re: ACPICA version 20120518 linuxized patches > > On 05/22/2012 04:52 AM, Lin Ming wrote: > > > Hi Len, > > > > ACPICA version 20120518 linuxized patches attached. > > > > [PATCH 1/6] ACPICA: Disassembler: Add support for Operation Region > > externals [PATCH 2/6] ACPICA: ACPI 5/iASL: Add support for PCC > keyword > > [PATCH 3/6] ACPICA: iASL: Improved pathname support [PATCH 4/6] > > ACPICA: Remove argument of acpi_os_wait_events_complete [PATCH 5/6] > > ACPICA: Add FADT error message for GAS BitWidth overflow [PATCH 6/6] > > ACPICA: Update to version 20120518 > > > > Regards, > > Lin Ming > > > Applied. > > I is great that the compiler and interpreter share the same code. > However, there is also the risk of building dead compiler code into the > kernel. We should probably do an analysis of that... > > thanks, > Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{�����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
