On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 3:00 AM, Moore, Robert <robert.moore@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. That is because the patches also changed the core code. drivers/acpi/acpica/dsfield.c include/acpi/actypes.h drivers/acpi/acpica/utmisc.c So we need to apply them to avoid divergence problem. Lin Ming > > 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 > -- 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
