James Carlson wrote: > Kerry Shu writes: >> My current implementation is to define a static array with known vendor >> specific modules name(currently only acpi_toshiba) in acpi_drv. >> Yes, it expects at most one of them to return 0 from _init(). > > OK; thanks. That's what I was looking for. > >> Got it. If I do find conflicts in our testing, I'll take your >> suggestion. Thanks! Btw, for Toshiba, we are searching for "TOS6208" and >> "TOS1900" in ACPI namespace. > > But no TOS6200?
We only got docs about "TOS6208" and "TOS1900" from Toshiba. And the Toshiba laptops we have support either of them. I'll ask IHV team for help to get info about "TOS1900". It should be straightforward to add it or more in if we have the related docs. Thanks! > > (I think Linux is trying to unify the various naming schemes, > including ACPI modules, PCI IDs, and others, through lkddb. It'd be > nice if we could do something similar rather than having a new wheel.) > How do you think about our current ACPI modules naming? acpi_drv: for generic ACPI method acpi_toshiba, acpi_XXXX: for vendor specific ACPI method Regards, Kerry
