Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:21:22 -0800
From:      Nate Lawson <nate@root.org>
To:        Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
Cc:        freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: acpi_ec_ecdt_probe => acpi_ec_identify
Message-ID:  <4B6BB8E2.6080204@root.org>
In-Reply-To: <4B6BB7AF.3040205@icyb.net.ua>
References:  <4B6B4A3C.5090308@icyb.net.ua> <4B6BB263.4040604@root.org> <4B6BB7AF.3040205@icyb.net.ua>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Andriy Gapon wrote:
> on 05/02/2010 07:53 Nate Lawson said the following:
>> I agree in concept. The ECDT-based probe method was intended to get it
>> active as early as possible, and Linux has a quirk to create a fake ECDT
>> to get an early EC on some systems that require it but don't have an ECDT.
>>
>> However, I thought jhb@'s multi-pass probe work would be a better way to
>> support this than moving it into device_identify(). Is that code ready
>> to use yet?
> 
> I agree with this.  But, unfortunately, the code doesn't seem to be as ready as
> everyone would love it to be.

Ok, then identify() is fine too.

-- 
Nate




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4B6BB8E2.6080204>