From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765852AbYETMK1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 08:10:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760427AbYETMKQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 08:10:16 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.168]:14933 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752790AbYETMKP convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 08:10:15 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=VWyISeKWd4V+9UejXqhfaFDgawsatG3XEyfd5xNHQgafcC+TBXJ6rjr1Zs4jZu3XDqXKtTAVgJmwlSPmDl6eM7mXiLTzxz7nGyz2w1kvqe17a8+LnCGFCxQOUEuXuUMuJscro2nmmazSNyNlOUOqrzs8Rdxh0TAKwYJTpewNkCE= Message-ID: <4832BF97.2070405@googlemail.com> Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 14:09:59 +0200 From: Gabriel C User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080502) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alan Jenkins CC: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?David_H=E4rdeman?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Loading DSDT from initrd, can it be done from grub instead? References: <12bd24d7-17d4-4df8-abca-42740ec309fe@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: <12bd24d7-17d4-4df8-abca-42740ec309fe@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alan Jenkins wrote: > David Härdeman wrote: >> In commit 9a9e0d685553af76cb6ae2af93cca4913e7fcd47 the >> ACPI_CUSTOM_DSDT_INITRD option was removed. >> >> I was wondering if it'd be feasible to hack grub to load a custom DSDT >> instead (since grub can read filesystems) and then pass a pointer to a >> memory location containing the DSDT to the kernel? > > Um, why? What stops you from reverting the offending commit? > > Without further info, I'd assume the feature was removed on policy > grounds. I.e. it's not nice to be effectively patching the BIOS > yourself, and vendors have fixed most of their BIOS's / linux is > slightly more tolerant to broken ones. I don't know whats wrong with > reading files from the initrd. It was reverted because the code was not really ready and caused some problems. > > Alan Gabriel