From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S2993111AbXCIKjm@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S2993111AbXCIKjm (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 9 Mar 2007 05:39:42 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S2993112AbXCIKjm
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 9 Mar 2007 05:39:42 -0500
Received: from mga07.intel.com ([143.182.124.22]:18068 "EHLO
	azsmga101.ch.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S2993113AbXCIKjk (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 9 Mar 2007 05:39:40 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: i="4.14,267,1170662400"; 
   d="scan'208"; a="193037797:sNHT23558808"
Message-ID: <45F13965.2030709@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 13:39:33 +0300
From: Alexey Starikovskiy <alexey.y.starikovskiy@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
CC: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, "Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>,
       Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
       Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>, Rudolf Marek <r.marek@assembler.cz>,
       linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] Could the k8temp driver be interfering with ACPI?
References: <20070302220454.a0c66d04.khali@linux-fr.org>	<B28E9812BAF6E2498B7EC5C427F293A402021B07@orsmsx415.amr.corp.intel.com>	<20070309071855.GA5148@ucw.cz> <20070309112420.42420cf2.khali@linux-fr.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070309112420.42420cf2.khali@linux-fr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 07:18:56 +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
>   
>>> Port (and memory) addresses can be dynamically generated by the AML code
>>> and thus, there is no way that the ACPI subsystem can statically predict
>>> any addresses that will be accessed by the AML.
>>>       
>> Can you take this as a wishlist item?
>>
>> It would be nice if next version of acpi specs supported table
>>
>> 'AML / SMM BIOS will access these ports'
>>
>> ...so we can get it correct with acpi4 or something..?
>>     
>
> I can only second Pavel's wish here. This would be highly convenient
> for OS developers to at least know which resources are accessed by AML
> and SMM. Without this information, we can never be sure that OS-level
> code won't conflict with ACPI or SMM.
>
>   
BIOS vendors are not required to support latest and greatest ACPI spec. 
So even if some future spec version
will include this ports description, we will still have majority of 
hardware not exporting it...

Regards,
    Alex.