On Sat, Dec 02, 2006 at 08:45:52AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> now here's another question...
And a good one, indeed.
> the ACPI layer got improved over the last
> 18 months bigtime to behave more like windows in many ways. How much of
> this is still really needed?
I have not used a mach
On Sat 2006-12-02 18:34:59, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> On Saturday 02 December 2006 13:50, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > > Acer notebook users here dump DSDT from their own machine, fix it and
> > > then load via initrd. No legal problems. (... and without that even
> > > battery can't be monitored
On Saturday 02 December 2006 13:50, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Acer notebook users here dump DSDT from their own machine, fix it and
> > then load via initrd. No legal problems. (... and without that even
> > battery can't be monitored on sych notebooks)
>
> Merge smart battery support, instead of ha
Hi!
> > > > Does that change the fact it is ugly ?
> > >
> > > No, but it does beg the question "how else can it be done"?
> >
> > Agreed.
>
> So how else can it be done?
>
> > > Distros need a way for users to add a fixed DSDT without recompiling
> > > their own kernels.
> >
> > Legal rights to
On Sat, 02 Dec 2006 11:30:32 +0100 Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 13:36 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > I'd be willing to bet that most distros have this patch in their kernel.
> > One of those things we can't really live without.
> >
> > What I haven't understood is why it isn't in
>> I'd be willing to bet that most distros have this patch in their kernel.
>> One of those things we can't really live without.
>>
>> What I haven't understood is why it isn't included in the mainline
>> kernel yet.
>
>it's not that hard ;)
>
>replacing the DSDT code *while it's live* is just a
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 13:36 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> I'd be willing to bet that most distros have this patch in their kernel.
> One of those things we can't really live without.
>
> What I haven't understood is why it isn't included in the mainline
> kernel yet.
it's not that hard ;)
replacin
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 22:17 +, Alan wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 23:01:20 +0100
> Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Acer notebook users here dump DSDT from their own machine, fix it and then
> > load via initrd.
>
> Under EU law thats two copies without permission and mod
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 19:21 -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 03:58:14PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 19:53 +, Alan wrote:
> > > > > The whole approach of using filp_open() not the firmware interface
> > > > > is horribly ugly and does not belong mains
> Providing object files for on-demand relinking of the kernel just adds a
> shit load of overhead. If you're suggesting modifying vmlinuz in place
> instead, that just seems really undesirable. Last thing I want is
> something mucking with the kernel binary.
... while randomly mucking with the b
On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 03:58:14PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 19:53 +, Alan wrote:
> > > > The whole approach of using filp_open() not the firmware interface
> > > > is horribly ugly and does not belong mainstream.
> > >
> > > What about the point that userspace (u
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 22:49 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 16:01 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 20:45 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 14:35 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > > What about the point that userspace (udev, and such)
On Fri, 1 Dec 2006 23:01:20 +0100
Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Acer notebook users here dump DSDT from their own machine, fix it and then
> load via initrd.
Under EU law thats two copies without permission and modification without
permission of the rights holder
> > an
On Friday 01 December 2006 22:55, Alan wrote:
> > > Does that change the fact it is ugly ?
> >
> > No, but it does beg the question "how else can it be done"?
>
> Agreed.
So how else can it be done?
> > Distros need a way for users to add a fixed DSDT without recompiling
> > their own kernels.
>
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 16:01 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 20:45 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 14:35 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > > What about the point that userspace (udev, and such) is not available
> > > when DSDT loading needs to occur? Init hasn'
> > Does that change the fact it is ugly ?
>
> No, but it does beg the question "how else can it be done"?
Agreed.
> Distros need a way for users to add a fixed DSDT without recompiling
> their own kernels.
Legal rights to do so aside, do they ? and if they do does it have to be
an ugly hack i
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 20:45 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 14:35 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> > What about the point that userspace (udev, and such) is not available
> > when DSDT loading needs to occur? Init hasn't even started at that
> > point.
>
> that's a moot point; yo
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 19:53 +, Alan wrote:
> > > The whole approach of using filp_open() not the firmware interface
> > > is horribly ugly and does not belong mainstream.
> >
> > What about the point that userspace (udev, and such) is not available
> > when DSDT loading needs to occur? Init h
> > The whole approach of using filp_open() not the firmware interface
> > is horribly ugly and does not belong mainstream.
>
> What about the point that userspace (udev, and such) is not available
> when DSDT loading needs to occur? Init hasn't even started at that
> point.
Does that change the
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 14:35 -0500, Ben Collins wrote:
> What about the point that userspace (udev, and such) is not available
> when DSDT loading needs to occur? Init hasn't even started at that
> point.
that's a moot point; you need to load firmware from the initramfs ANYWAY
for things like qlogi
On Fri, 2006-12-01 at 18:56 +, Alan wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 13:36:19 -0500
> Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'd be willing to bet that most distros have this patch in their kernel.
> > One of those things we can't really live without.
>
> This has been suggested various tim
On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 13:36:19 -0500
Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd be willing to bet that most distros have this patch in their kernel.
> One of those things we can't really live without.
This has been suggested various times before.
| +Before you run away from customising your DSD
I'd be willing to bet that most distros have this patch in their kernel.
One of those things we can't really live without.
What I haven't understood is why it isn't included in the mainline
kernel yet. There's enough kernel hackers out there using this that I
doubt it will get stale or broken for
23 matches
Mail list logo
