On Apr 19, 2011, at 2:24 PM, Brandon Gooch wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Warner Losh <[email protected]> wrote: >> Having chased boogiemen in this area before, I think this patch makes good >> sense even though it breaks the device model a little. However, the >> hardware in question really is special on x86... >> >> Warner > > Sorry Warner, would you mind elaborating on the above? Do you mean > that the patch moves to being too x86-specific for syscons handling?
I mean that this device is special in the architecture, so having some special code to cope with it is ok. Warner > > Sorry if I'm being too dense. > > -Brandon > >> On Apr 19, 2011, at 12:48 PM, Brandon Gooch wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Taku YAMAMOTO <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:31:33 +0900 >>>> Taku YAMAMOTO <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> A patch is attached. >>>> Mailman ate it ;) >>>> Here it is. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> -|-__ YAMAMOTO, Taku >>>> | __ < <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> - A chicken is an egg's way of producing more eggs. - >>>> >>> >>> Throughout testing, I've seen zero regressions. In fact, an issue that >>> existed prior to this patch involving minor screen corruption (dirty >>> VGA buffers) is gone (Intel Mobile 965 Express). >>> >>> Thank you so much guys! >>> >>> -Brandon > > _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
