lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: acpi4asus
Pavel Machek wrote:

>Hi!
>
>
>
>>>I am far from qualified to comment on this, but from a
>>>users point of view, is it possible to not have laptop
>>>specific code in the kernel?
>>>I have had two Linux laptops and with both I had ACPI
>>>issues.
>>>The vendors of both laptops (Toshiba Tecra S1 and now
>>>an Asus W3V) don't seem to be following standards. With
>>>both I seem to need to patch ACPI to get various
>>>functions of the laptop to work.
>>>I would love to see laptop specific functionality
>>>definitions exist outside the kernel.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I don't think that forcing laptop users to have their
>>own code outside the kernel is really the best approach
>>for either the developers or the users. Most users will
>>
>>
>
>No, we don't want that. But we do not want ibm-acpi, toshiba-acpi,
>asus-acpi, etc, when they really only differ in string constants used.
>
>We want userland to tell kernel 'mail led is controlled by AML routine
>foo', instead of having gazillion *-acpi modules.
>
>
>
>
I see no reason why an interface to that couldn't be included in the
kernel, with just a small table for each hardware instead of a whole
module. Kind of a white list with detail.

--
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
CTO TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-05-17 05:25    [W:0.049 / U:2.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site