From: Len B. <len...@in...> - 2004-08-09 19:41:59
|
On Mon, 2004-08-09 at 14:28, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > On 09 Aug 2004 12:59:16 -0400, Len Brown <len.brown <at> intel.com> > wrote: > > This looks handy. > > comments? > > You should take the patch of Michael Blumenstein for initrd support: > > http://gaugusch.at/kernel.shtml > > http://gaugusch.at/acpi-dsdt-initrd-patches/acpi-dsdt-initrd-patch-v0.4-2.6.7.patch > > I use it and I can confirm that it works :) Yes, the dsdt-in-initrd patch works. Yes, it is perfect for the unfortunate but determined soul who administers a variety of broken machines where they all run the same kernel and require a different DSDT -- I really do feel sorry for that person and look forward to the day they find non-broken hardware. But DSDT overrides are for developers, not end-users, not customers. Nobody can support the OEM's firmware, or a modified version of it except the OEM themselves. If a developer happens to fix an OEM's firmware and sends the OEM the fix, that happy situation is purely between the end-user and the OEM. Distros should absolutely never be in the business of supporting hardware running modified firmware. I think that one major Distro pulled the dsdt-in-initrd patch, and I think it was a mistake for them to do so -- they can't support it. That said, it is useful for developers to be able to override the DSDT. There are two methods -- re-build kernel or re-build kernel and also modify the initrd. Kernel re-build is (I think) simple enought. I think the patch at hand takes it from simple to trivial. Kernel re-build + initrd update I dislike because it depends on the existence of an initrd (not everybody uses has an initrd, I haven't used an initrd in over a year), and worse, it depends on the format of the initrd, which we don't control. Anyway, I hope that my position, and the reason I haven't pulled the perfectly functional and useful dsdt-in-initrd patch before is clear. Any comments on the patch at hand? thanks, -Len |