ACPICA vs. Linux status

ACPICA vs. Linux status

[Len Brown]

> Subject: [Patch 1/8] ACPICA: Update _OSI string list

applied

> Subject: [Patch 2/8] ACPICA: Changes for Cygwin compatibility

applied

> Subject: [Patch 3/8] ACPICA: Support for external package objects as method arguments

applied after hand editing.
Unclear why hand-ending was necessary, as there were no Linux specific
changes to this file beneath this delta.
Must be either Lindent weirdness or 0x20070320, mentioned below.

> Subject: [Patch 4/8] ACPICA: Fixed possible corruption of global GPE list

applied

> Subject: [Patch 5/8] ACPICA: Fix for update of the Global Lock Handle

did not apply, as it conflicts with the pre-existing Linux fix here,
which I decided to keep for the time being.

> Subject: [Patch 6/8] ACPICA: Change to make Notify() operator completely synchronous

While the patch applied, it did not work, and is thus rejected.
It caused "cat temperature" on my nx6325 to deadlock someplace
in the region of a trip point.

> Subject: [Patch 7/8] ACPICA: Clear reserved fields for incoming ACPI 1.0 FADTs

applied.

> Subject: [Patch 8/8] ACPICA: Update version to 20070508

did not apply, and didn't hand-apply it for two reasons:
1. we don't yet include all the changes from 20070508.

2. It expects ACPICA version 0x20070320 underneath,
but Linux doesn't have that version, it is at 0x20070126.

Bob, Please send the patch series for 0x20070320.

thanks,
-Len

Re: ACPICA vs. Linux status

[Alexey Starikovskiy]

Len,

Do you still plan to do "git cvsimport" of ACPICA and put it somethere
visible?

Regards,
Alex.

Len Brown ?????:
>> Subject: [Patch 1/8] ACPICA: Update _OSI string list
> 
> applied
> 
>> Subject: [Patch 2/8] ACPICA: Changes for Cygwin compatibility
> 
> applied
> 
>> Subject: [Patch 3/8] ACPICA: Support for external package objects as method arguments
> 
> applied after hand editing.
> Unclear why hand-ending was necessary, as there were no Linux specific
> changes to this file beneath this delta.
> Must be either Lindent weirdness or 0x20070320, mentioned below.
> 
>> Subject: [Patch 4/8] ACPICA: Fixed possible corruption of global GPE list
> 
> applied
> 
>> Subject: [Patch 5/8] ACPICA: Fix for update of the Global Lock Handle
> 
> did not apply, as it conflicts with the pre-existing Linux fix here,
> which I decided to keep for the time being.
> 
>> Subject: [Patch 6/8] ACPICA: Change to make Notify() operator completely synchronous
> 
> While the patch applied, it did not work, and is thus rejected.
> It caused "cat temperature" on my nx6325 to deadlock someplace
> in the region of a trip point.
> 
>> Subject: [Patch 7/8] ACPICA: Clear reserved fields for incoming ACPI 1.0 FADTs
> 
> applied.
> 
>> Subject: [Patch 8/8] ACPICA: Update version to 20070508
> 
> did not apply, and didn't hand-apply it for two reasons:
> 1. we don't yet include all the changes from 20070508.
> 
> 2. It expects ACPICA version 0x20070320 underneath,
> but Linux doesn't have that version, it is at 0x20070126.
> 
> Bob, Please send the patch series for 0x20070320.
> 
> thanks,
> -Len
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

Re: ACPICA vs. Linux status

[Len Brown]

On Wednesday 30 May 2007 03:43, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Len,
> 
> Do you still plan to do "git cvsimport" of ACPICA and put it somethere
> visible?

Yes, I'd like to get the backing repository for the ACPICA tree
visible rather than just the tar file we distribute today.
I'd also like to make it easier for people outside of Intel
to contribute patches to it.

Bob is on sabatical right now, and I don't anticipate
this happening before he returns.

-Len