From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "malattia@linux.it" Subject: Re: [patch 0/5] iASL patches in Debian Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 06:29:57 +0900 Message-ID: <20100715212956.GA28893@kamineko.org> References: <20100704044332.573836359@linux.it> <4911F71203A09E4D9981D27F9D830858A10EFE10@orsmsx503.amr.corp.intel.com> <20100707220736.GD5635@kamineko.org> <1278550164.3638.12.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> <20100708134928.GD1909@kamineko.org> <1278626807.2164.17.camel@localhost> <20100708144026.GE1909@kamineko.org> <1279071763.4404.5.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from static-220-247-10-204.b-man.svips.gol.ne.jp ([220.247.10.204]:51503 "EHLO smtp.kamineko.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933759Ab0GOV37 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:29:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1279071763.4404.5.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Lin Ming Cc: "Moore, Robert" , Len Brown , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 09:42:43AM +0800, Lin Ming wrote: > On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 22:40 +0800, malattia@linux.it wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 10:06:47PM +0000, Lin Ming wrote: ... > > > > Compilation complete. 0 Errors, 83 Warnings, 18 Remarks, 0 Optimizations > > > > ASL Input: MAIN.asl - 62 lines, 962044 bytes, 20265 keywords > > > > -AML Output: oconst.aml - 255557 bytes, 862 named objects, 19403 executable opcodes > > > > +AML Output: oconst.aml - 255575 bytes, 862 named objects, 19403 executable opcodes > > > > > > Why do the aml files have different size? > > > Is it caused by big/small endian? > > > > They should be identical, possibly my patch is incomplete or not > > correct. Out of the ~180 tests only the ones in the diff show > > differences. > > I'll have to check what is wrong on sparc64 for them. > > Hi, > > Did you find out why they are different? > > You can disassemble the aml files and see what the differences are. haven't had the time to go after it yet. apologies. But on a separate note, I assume there is interest in applying the patches to the upstream tree (at least once they are complete). Thanks! -- mattia :wq!