acpi as kernel module on i386

[Rong-En Fan]

On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 09:32:52AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 May 2006 18:51, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> > On May 2, 2006, at 12:59 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 14:18, Rong-En Fan wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> Recently commit to ppc code that also decouples the isa+acpi
> > >> attachment into separate case, that makes my ppc and lpt disappear
> > >> if acpi is loaded as a module. (see the thread "lpt0 disappear (ppc
> > >> related) on -current)
> > >>
> > >> However, i386/conf/NOTES says that building acpi into module is
> > >> deprecated. Just wondering why amd64 uses acpi in kernel conf
> > >> (I'm not sure about other arch), and on i386 we said this is a
> > >> deprecated usage?
> > >
> > > ACPI is mandatory for amd64 and ia64, but it is optional on i386.
> > > Because it is optional, it is a module so that the loader can only
> > > load it on machines that support it.  I think the ppc module should
> > > be changed to include the acpi attachment personally, assuming that
> > > the ppc module already includes the ppc isa attachment.
> > 
> > On i386, it should be safe to compile the acpi(4) attachment when only
> > device isa is configured into the kernel. It should not be done for all
> > platforms. While acpi(4) is mandatory on ia64, isa(4) isn't and it's
> > my goal to get rid of isa(4) altogether on ia64.
> 
> Well, the ppc acpi attachment can be optionally included in the module
> build for the archs that ppc acpi devices.
> 
> > Alternatively, acpi(4) can be considered non-optional for current
> > x86 hardware and having acpi(4) configured into the kernel is not
> > such an odd thing to do for a modern x86 operating system.
> 
> I personally compile 'device acpi' into my kernels on i386 and
> basically never use modules except for development anyway.

Well, thanks for all the replies. I decided to compile acpi into 
my kernel. Now lpt0 is happy to show up again :)

Thanks,
Rong-En Fan