| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 15:59:50 +0000 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> To: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net> Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, lenb@...nel.org, "linux-acpi@...r" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.21-rc5-git] make /proc/acpi/wakeup more useful Hi! > > Are you _sure_ you have a 1-to-1 relationship here? No multiple devices > > pointing to the same acpi node? Or the other way around? If so, you > > are going to have to change the name to be something more unique. > > I've wondered that too. The short answer: APCI only supports 1-1 > here. It will emit warnings if it tries to bind more than one ACPI ... > Assuming they all adopt that same "parallel tree" model, that seems > like a good idea. The tools will likely need to understand how ACPI > and OF differ, but there's no point in reserving more names than we > really need. Though it may be that "parallel trees" should go away. If mapping is indeed 1-to-1 in acpi... it would be nice to just merge the trees. -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists