Hi,
> > I prefer previous patch because most of the code in i386/acpi_machdep.c
> > can be shared with IA64 I think.
>
> I'm not so sure about that. I suspect that the IA64 code is going to be
> using the 'generic address' structures and the x-fields in eg. the FACT.
> It won't be using the bios signature search either, or the int15
> interface. Realistically, the code in acpi_machdep.c is very simple.a
>
> I also think that if I'm going to continue to use a private identify
> method to attach ACPI (IMO a good idea) then I want to keep its
> implementation as separate from the 'generic' ACPI code as possible. The
> pmap interface and one checksum routine is all that the current division
> uses, and that's fairly clean.
OK, understood. How about having MD sub-routine in the same interface
(say acpi_set_resources() or acpi_create_instance() or whatever) for
i386 and ia64? Then generic ACPI identify method calls suitable
sub-routine depending on machine architecture.
- i386/i386/acpi_machdep.c
acpi_set_resources() (ex-acpiprobe_identify())
- ia64/ia64/acpi_machdep.c
acpi_set_resources()
- dev/acpi/acpi.c
acpi_identify()
this is quite simple, just do simple error checking and
call acpi_set_resources() then return.
Is this good for you too?
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
