On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:56:31PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > > I guess we could leave it as is for now for -fixes and then switch it > > use use the new exported symbol for -next? Is it ok to export a new > > symbol for -fixes?
I don't see why not, providing the ACPI people are happy with it. > >> So, er, I had no clue how to clean up the return value of acpi_get_table > >> - does this actually need to be cleaned up? Or do you just get a > >> pointer straight to the "real" ACPI table? > > > > Not sure on that. Anyone know more about the acpi code? Not sure what you're asking here - acpi_get_table returns acpi_status, not a pointer. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
