Chance of dynamic loading of alternate AML code getting in?

[Hans de Goede]

Hi all,

AFAIK ubuntu includes a patch to allow dynamic loading of alternate AML code 
dumps, to work around bios ACPI bugs. I know BIOS's and the kernel ACPI code 
are getting betterm but for some laptops this is needed, any chance this could 
be included into the Fedora kernel?

Also any chance of getting this included upstream?

Regards,

Hans

[Dave Jones]

On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 07:53:00PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> AFAIK ubuntu includes a patch to allow dynamic loading of alternate AML code 
> dumps, to work around bios ACPI bugs. I know BIOS's and the kernel ACPI code 
> are getting betterm but for some laptops this is needed, any chance this could 
> be included into the Fedora kernel?
>
> Also any chance of getting this included upstream?

The Intel ACPI maintainers are really against including that patch,
and express dismay that other vendors that do include it.
> From conversation I've had with LenB, he's pretty happy that we don't

include it.  Keeping the upstream maintainers happy so that they're
interested in looking at our bugs is far more useful in the long run imo.

Dave

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Dave Jones schrieb:
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 07:53:00PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > AFAIK ubuntu includes a patch to allow dynamic loading of alternate AML code 
> > dumps, to work around bios ACPI bugs. I know BIOS's and the kernel ACPI code 
> > are getting betterm but for some laptops this is needed, any chance this could 
> > be included into the Fedora kernel?
> >
> > Also any chance of getting this included upstream?
>
> The Intel ACPI maintainers are really against including that patch,
> and express dismay that other vendors that do include it.
> From conversation I've had with LenB, he's pretty happy that we don't
> include it.  Keeping the upstream maintainers happy so that they're
> interested in looking at our bugs is far more useful in the long run imo.

Agreed. I'd also got the impression from my testing that the ACPI 
interpreter *and/or* the ACPI tables in modern hardware is a lot better 
these days, so the need to include the patch is not that pressing 
anymore IMHO.

<crazy thought>But it might be nice to make it a bit more easy for 
people to somehow include a modified DST with the in-kernel-mechanism 
when they recompile the kernel srpm... Currently it's quite hard to do 
that afaics<crazy thought>

CU
thl