From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 5 19:56:11 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9995916A41F for ; Sat, 5 Nov 2005 19:56:11 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from www.cryptography.com (li-22.members.linode.com [64.5.53.22]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48D0C43D45 for ; Sat, 5 Nov 2005 19:56:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nate@root.org) Received: from [10.0.5.50] (ppp-71-139-0-107.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [71.139.0.107]) by www.cryptography.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id jA5Jtxxq003766 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sat, 5 Nov 2005 11:56:02 -0800 Message-ID: <436D0E25.6090201@root.org> Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 11:55:17 -0800 From: Nate Lawson User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mathieu Prevot References: <78F7D8FC-B5AA-4723-8336-E60F873D9414@club-internet.fr> <4367BCA6.5050609@root.org> <091FFA92-6E5C-4E15-A86F-D158E463A9D3@club-internet.fr> In-Reply-To: <091FFA92-6E5C-4E15-A86F-D158E463A9D3@club-internet.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ACPI and 3.0 specification X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 19:56:11 -0000 Mathieu Prevot wrote: >> acpi 3.0 adds very little useful stuff unless you're interested in >> large NUMA machines. We'd be better off implementing more support >> for those systems in the main kernel and then acpi, not the other way >> around. >> >> -- >> Nate > > > Thanks for these pieces of information. Do you implement first in the > kernel for performance only ? It seems to be the hard way. > Regards It's in the kernel because the kernel needs it for configuration. When probing the bus topology, no user code is even runnable yet. -- Nate