From owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org  Tue Nov  6 02:43:24 2001
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) id CAA07861;
	Tue, 6 Nov 2001 02:43:24 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from tasogare.imasy.or.jp (root@tasogare.imasy.or.jp [202.227.24.5])
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA07856
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 02:43:23 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost (iwasaki.imasy.or.jp [202.227.24.92])
	(authenticated as iwa with CRAM-MD5)
	by tasogare.imasy.or.jp (8.11.6+3.4W/8.11.6/tasogare) with ESMTP/inet id fA5HhMW32664
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Tue, 6 Nov 2001 02:43:22 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2001 02:43:18 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20011106.024318.104025878.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org>
To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
From: Mitsuru IWASAKI <iwasaki@jp.freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <200111031952.fA3JqdV01241@mass.dis.org>
References: <20011103.215247.74755901.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org>
	<200111031952.fA3JqdV01241@mass.dis.org>
X-Mailer: Mew version 2.0 on Emacs 20.7 / Mule 4.0 (HANANOEN)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Precedence: list
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+010328
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 1436
Subject: [acpi-jp 1436] Re: DSDT Override 
Errors-To: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
X-Originator: iwasaki@jp.freebsd.org

> > > I would be much happier if it was possible to override small portions of th
> > e
> > > namespace, rather than being forced into this all-or-nothing situation.
> > 
> > Yeah, it's very nice for partial fix of DSDT.  But I believe that BIOS
> > bug fix is BIOS vendor's job, not ours.
> 
> I don't understand you here; it sounds like you are disagreeing with your 
> previous statement.

I think it's more important that BIOS vendors notice their bugs and
fix them rather than we make the patches against disassembled ASLs.
I'd like to suggest that we'd better to have the blacklist of ACPI
BIOS which is incompatible with ACPI spec and ACPI CA.
ASL patch should be optional and maybe temporary workaround for users.
For BIOS vendors, it would be a good suggestion.
And we need DSDT override functionality for creating and testing ASL
patches.

> At any rate, please do go ahead with the DSDT override functionality.  

Roger!
