ACPI support

Stefan Reinauer stepan at
Thu Mar 11 09:10:01 CET 2004

* ron minnich <rminnich at> [040311 15:16]:
> On 11 Mar 2004, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > If the BIOS has to implement services an interpreted byte code where the
> > kernel provides the interpreter at least gives the kernel guys the
> > option of catching bugs, and working around them.  I completely prefer
> > AML over BIOS callbacks.
> YES!

In case of broken 16bit bioses there might be a point. But for us I
don't really see the difference. If it's broken, we can fix it. Even
when using callbacks, can't we?

  Stefan Reinauer, SUSE LINUX AG
Head of Architecture Development

More information about the coreboot mailing list