On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 12:37:52PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Agreed. In my limited skimming I haven't seen the board id come > back wrong. But I have seen a lot of the other fields come > back nonsense. My favorite was the report of sdram in a system > equipped with rimms.
I think 2048k cache along with a '1024k maximum cache' was one of the more amusing ones so far 8-) > > (This table is easily parsable btw, no need for AML interpretors > > and other ACPI evils) > Which table is easily parsable the newer ACPI stuff, or the DMI table? Probably about equal in terms of codesize and complexity. It's just an mmap of /dev/mem, and poking around for the right structs. -- | Dave Jones. http://www.codemonkey.org.uk | SuSE Labs
