Hi,
On 7/27/06, Bjorn Helgaas <[email protected]> wrote:
I always thought that ACPI was supposed to describe everything that
(a) consumes resources or requires a driver and (b) is not enumerable
by other hardware standards such as PCI.
If that's true, isn't it a BIOS defect if this embedded controller isn't
described via ACPI?
The ThinkPad ACPI tables do list the relevant IO ports (0x1600-0x161F)
as reserved, but provide no way to discern what's behind them. Other
machines have different hardware on the same ports.
BTW, I should clarify that this embedded controller interface (used by
hdaps and tp_smapi) is different than the standard ACPI EC interface,
and goes through different IO ports.
it seems like the ideal way forward
would be to get the BIOS fixed so you could claim the device with PNP
for future ThinkPads, and the table of OEM strings would not require
ongoing maintenance.
This is unrealistic. The hdaps and tp_smapi drivers support dozens of
ThinkPad models, each with a different BIOS.
For the tp_smapi driver, AFAIK the only completely safe alternative to
this patch is a frequently-updated whitelist of over a hundred models,
identified by the existing DMI attributes.
Shem
-
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]