From owner-cvs-all Thu Sep 21 0: 1:32 2000 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from tasogare.imasy.or.jp (tasogare.imasy.or.jp [202.227.24.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19CAA37B423; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 00:01:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (iwasaki.imasy.or.jp [202.227.24.92]) by tasogare.imasy.or.jp (8.10.2+3.3W/3.7W-tasogare/smtpfeed 1.07) with ESMTP id e8L71Or09882; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 16:01:24 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org) To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org, msmith@freebsd.org Cc: iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [acpi-jp 654] Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/acpi/aml aml_evalobj.c aml_evalobj.h aml_obj.c aml_parse.c In-Reply-To: <200009210435.VAA00733@mass.osd.bsdi.com> References: <20000921132655G.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org> <200009210435.VAA00733@mass.osd.bsdi.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.1 on Emacs 19.34 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20000921155852T.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 15:58:52 +0900 From: Mitsuru IWASAKI X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140) Lines: 29 Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > # Cc acpi-jp because this is related with AML interpreter improvement. > > A related question - since you've mentioned that you've considered using > the Intel ACPICA code (and I think this is a good idea unless there are > other reasons not to do so), what interfaces does it provide for this > sort of thing? Oh, it's a very important suggestion :-) We already have part of Osd* functions which is some sort of OS abstraction layer, but don't have any interfaces between acpi driver and the Intel ACPICA code for now. I personally think that we can replace the interpreter code always if we want to do so, but we need to evaluate their code (including modifications in Linux) before we go. We'd better to keep maintaining our interpreter code until we agree to go with Intel code. Comparing Linux 2.4.0-testX and the original Intel ACPICA code, I noticed that there are too many changes between them more than naming chages :-( This fact is giving me a big hesitation actually... We need to keep watching where these two development are going to. Anyway, we should consult with Intel ACPICA Programmer Reference whenever we create a new API to AML interpreter as possible in order to make glue layer code development easier. I think it's the best thing we can do for now. Thanks! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message