From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 30 15:07:54 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BD9116A4CE for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 15:07:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from root.org (root.org [67.118.192.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0168B43D1D for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 15:07:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: (qmail 83546 invoked by uid 1000); 30 Mar 2004 23:07:55 -0000 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 15:07:55 -0800 (PST) From: Nate Lawson To: "Moore, Robert" In-Reply-To: <37F890616C995246BE76B3E6B2DBE0552D0666@orsmsx403.jf.intel.com> Message-ID: <20040330150718.T83533@root.org> References: <37F890616C995246BE76B3E6B2DBE0552D0666@orsmsx403.jf.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: current@freebsd.org cc: acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org Subject: RE: [acpi-jp 3117] RE: ACPI-CA 20040311 imported X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 23:07:54 -0000 On Mon, 29 Mar 2004, Moore, Robert wrote: > There's nothing in the ACPI spec that precludes recursive methods. > However, I agree that it is a very scary thing to do. For this reason, > I have the iASL compiler issue a remark when it detects a recursive > method call. > > All AML interpreters that I know of implement nested and recursive > method calls without chewing up the kernel stack, i.e., a state is > allocated for each nested call and linked to the previous method state. Thanks for the info. I've disabled serialized methods by default now and left _OSI enabled by default. This matches the Linux approach. -Nate