Re: Re: ACPI_STRICT_COMPLIANCE (was RE: RE: ACPI -- Workaround forbroken DSDT)

On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 09:34:35AM +0100, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 01:50:43AM +0100, Bruno Ducrot wrote:
 

quoted

The 'toshiba return bug' is something like that:

Method(FOO) {
	return (0)
}

Method(BAR) {
	FOO()
}

If ACPI is pedantic, BAR return nothing.

Well, but it is a bug, so it _should_ fail with "acpi=strict", shouldn't it?

Yes.

If "acpi=strict" is omitted, the bug can be worked around and the buyers of
this crap can be happy.

Problem is that I don't know for what flavour of the no-named AML
interpreter that bug will be hit.  So at least the acpi=not_strict need
to be more fine grained.

-- 
Bruno Ducrot

--  Which is worse:  ignorance or apathy?
--  Don't know.  Don't care.


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now.
Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with
a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click