Re: ACPI 0228 import errata

In message: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0305012045130.90040-100000_at_root.org>
            Nate Lawson <nate_at_root.org> writes:
: On Thu, 1 May 2003, M. Warner Losh wrote:
: > In message: <20030501193258.GB778_at_athlon.pn.xcllnt.net>
: >             Marcel Moolenaar <marcel_at_xcllnt.net> writes:
: > : The question: do people think we should try to get another ACPI
: > : snapshot in (provided we have someone willing to do it) and thus
: > : try to get it fixed the "official" way or are we ok with changing
: > : contrib'd code in this case and revert to the vendor branch when
: > : we do upgrade sometime after 5.1?
: > 
: > We must have another snapshot with all the breakages that this import
: > caused fixed.  If Nate isn't willing to do it, I would be.  In the
: > long term it is in our best interest to get the issues resolved with
: > the Intel code.
: 
: First of all, please coordinate any future efforts with jhb_at_, marcel_at_,
: acpi-jp_at_, and myself as we were involved in making the 0228 import happen.  
: Second, I haven't seen a report about any problems from you on current_at_ or
: acpi-jp_at_.  Please send in a report so we can look into it.  jhb_at_ pulled in
: some local changes today which were missing from my import and which might
: address things.  Please cvsup and let us know if it fixes things.

Yea.  Too many 'freeing free blocks' panics...

: As to your other point ("we must have another snapshot"), be careful what
: you wish for.  GPE handling was completely rewritten for 0328 and gives
: major problems for people.  0424 fixed some of the problems, but like with
: any rewrite, there are still many that remain.  It's not clear that 052x
: will fix them either but by working with acpi-jp_at_, we can each do our part
: to at least make this a possibility.  We'd all really appreciate your
: help.

Yup.  I read the list, but have been burried until recently.  Having
my laptop being somewhat busted somewhat motivates me to help..

Warner