Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/dev/acpi
To: Christos Zoulas <email@example.com>
From: Quentin Garnier <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/13/2005 18:19:33
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 11:13:06AM -0500, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Dec 13, 7:42am, email@example.com (Jason Thorpe) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/dev/acpi
> | On Dec 12, 2005, at 4:59 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> | > You mean MI code? MachDep is just that. In this particular case, =20
> | > not every
> | > machine has ACPI. To compare, how about a machine that has =20
> | > turbochannel and
> | > needs a sysctl? I think that the precedence is hw.*, right?
> | Where do other devices get inserted into the tree?
> | Anyway, I think hw.acpi.root might be OK. Would allow for other ACPI =
> | nodes to be added later.
> Yes, hw.acpi.root sounds ok for now.
Ok, will do the change tonight.
By the way, do we want acpidump(8) in base or should I keep it in
pkgsrc? FreeBSD has all the acpica userland in base along with it,
but I think it's a bit much, although acpidump(8) would not seem out of
its place in base.
(Their acpidump depends on acpica's iasl program to disassemble the
Quentin Garnier - firstname.lastname@example.org - cube@NetBSD.org
"When I find the controls, I'll go where I like, I'll know where I want
to be, but maybe for now I'll stay right here on a silent sea."
KT Tunstall, Silent Sea, Eye to the Telescope, 2004.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----