Thus spake Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Sometimes. But see http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/DWIM.html
>
> I understand, but having a different failure is no worse than
> having a failure, I think. In either case, it doesn't work,
> even if it doesn't work in an entirely di
David Schultz wrote:
> > So the worst possible outcome in the failure case is that it
> > fails -- which it already does, without the assumption -- and
> > the best possible outcome is that it succeeds when it wouldn't
> > have.
> >
> > "Anything that works is better than anything that doesn't"
>
Thus spake Terry Lambert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> FWIW, there's historical precedent for this: the DEC VAX/VMS
> C compiler would imply semicolons for the programmer that
> forgot them, and a couple of other similar "fixups", issue a
> warning, but the resulting code would run "as the programmer
> m
: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 3:40 PM
To: Moore, Robert
Cc: 'Mitsuru IWASAKI'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; Grover, Andrew
Subject: Re: [acpi-jp 1735] Re: Call for testers: acpica-unix-20020815
"Moore, Robert" wrote:
> I think you are missing somethin
"Moore, Robert" wrote:
> I think you are missing something:
>
> 1) BIOS vendor writes ASL
> 2) BIOS vendor compiles ASL to AML byte-code
> 3) BIOS vendor puts AML into BIOS
> 4) OS gets AML from the BIOS
> 5) OS interprets AML
>
> The error you are experiencing is in (5). There is no return sta
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Moore, Robert wrote:
>
> This looks like the (in)famous "implicit return" problem that is in some
> Toshiba ASL files.
>
> Method(_CRS) {
> CRS_(0x10)
> }
>
> This does NOT actually return a value and the ASL code is inco
, Andrew
Subject: Re: [acpi-jp 1735] Re: Call for testers: acpica-unix-20020815
"Moore, Robert" wrote:
> Well, the *real* problem is that there is no Return AML opcode in the
> control method and the interpreter therefore does not return a value.
>
> However, to answer your ques
"Moore, Robert" wrote:
> Well, the *real* problem is that there is no Return AML opcode in the
> control method and the interpreter therefore does not return a value.
>
> However, to answer your question with a question:
>
> Would you ask a C compiler, or any other compiler for that matter, to
>
Re: [acpi-jp 1735] Re: Call for testers: acpica-unix-20020815
"Moore, Robert" wrote:
> This looks like the (in)famous "implicit return" problem that is in some
> Toshiba ASL files.
>
> Method(_CRS) {
> CRS_(0x10)
>
"Moore, Robert" wrote:
> This looks like the (in)famous "implicit return" problem that is in some
> Toshiba ASL files.
>
> Method(_CRS) {
> CRS_(0x10)
> }
>
> This does NOT actually return a value and the ASL code is incorrect. It has
> to be:
On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Mitsuru IWASAKI wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could you put the following lines into /boot/loader.conf and send
> dmesg output again?
>
> debug.acpi.layer="ACPI_ALL_COMPONENTS"
> debug.acpi.level="ACPI_LV_ERROR"
>
Of course, here we go :)
> >[sent privately to not spam
PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [acpi-jp 1735] Re: Call for testers: acpica-unix-20020815
Hi,
Could you put the following lines into /boot/loader.conf and send
dmesg output again?
debug.acpi.layer="ACPI_ALL_COMPONENTS"
debug.acpi.
Hi,
Could you put the following lines into /boot/loader.conf and send
dmesg output again?
debug.acpi.layer="ACPI_ALL_COMPONENTS"
debug.acpi.level="ACPI_LV_ERROR"
>[sent privately to not spam the lists with my dump files]
>
> On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Mitsuru IWASAKI wrote:
>
> > >
>FYI, I have now a "can't fetch resources for \\_SB_.PCI0.FNC0.PRT_ -
>AE_BAD_DATA" with acpica-unix-20020815 during boot.
I'd like to make sure if AE_BAD_DATA error occurred w/ previous
versions (acpica-unix-20020725, 20020611, 20020404...) ?
Or first time w/ acpica-unix-20020815 ?
Anyw
14 matches
Mail list logo
