[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080831172547.GA3077@srcf.ucam.org>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:25:47 +0100
From: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
To: Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>
Cc: Carlos Corbacho <carlos@...angeworlds.co.uk>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] ACPI BIOS Guideline for Linux
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 03:18:24PM +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> On Saturday 30 August 2008 02:47:13 pm Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Not really. It provides approximately no complexity for Linux drivers,
> > and makes it easier for vendors to provide Windows support. WMI has not
> > been the hard bit of the drivers I've written. I don't see any reason to
> > ask vendors not to use it,
> Autoloading does not work yet?
> It is working fine with ordinary ACPI devices providing a HID.
That's an implementation detail. We shouldn't be making recommendations
to vendors based on Linux shortcomings.
> > as long as they're willing to document their
> > implementation.
> I'll point that out, something like:
> If you really have to use WMI for Windows compatibility reason, make
> sure the important parts (is there already something to mention?
> Against what is the driver loaded -> autoloading?) are documented well.
There's no valid reason to suggest that vendors use an entirely custom
solution over using WMI. In some ways, reverse engineering is easier -
we can see all the entry points. But yes, vendors who want to support
Linux should document their firmware interfaces.
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59@...f.ucam.org
--
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