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 <[email protected]>
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 [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
