Jump to content
6 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Perhaps we should start listing the such imcompatible extensions in a thread here and compile them on the Wiki?

 

Sounds like a good idea to me. I think we should break the incompatible ones down into two groups: "show-stoppers", like ACPIPlatform, and "not-problems", like AppleOnboardDisplay.

 

 

Also, fwiw, all the ATIRadeon8500 kexts load and work no worse than the 10.4.3 ones.

 

op

There are plenty of 10.4.4 extensions that don't work in 10.4.3 (8f1111g). ACPIPlatform is one of them and will cause a kernel panic at boot.

 

op

 

 

I think is due to a system specs that causes some kexts to not load properly, according to myzar who copied all kexts from 10.4.4 and has no problems booting osx

 

myzar are you having problems with your OSX after applied all kexts from 10.4.4?

I just ran into this ACPI and ECI stuff on a Linux channel, looks like it might be applicable here:

 

It sounds like it's filling in some gaps in ACPI?

 

Matt replied, Not really. EFI is a broader interface to platform firmware and the hardware that has been designed to be generic, such that it may be implemented on any architecture and/or any platform. You can think of it as an interface to the traditional BIOS. In a pure EFI environment, the device model, various defined services and protocols, and structure negate the need for traditional BIOS calls. For example, you would no longer call int10h to change the video modes - instead you would call a function of a video/console protocol for the video device. Another example is the int15h call to get the e820 memory map is no longer required - instead EFI provides a memory map of all usable memory in the system, along with attributes, ranges, types, etc. As for its relationship to ACPI it is complementary. The EFI specification does not rewrite or redefine accepted standards such as ACPI. Instead it enables this type of platform configuration information to be obtained in a standard fashion.

 

...

 

Didn't Intel learn anything from past mistakes? ACPI was supposed to be "simple". Codswallop.

 

PCI works, because it had standard, and documented, hardware interfaces. The interfaces aren't well specified enough to write a PCI disk driver, of course, but they _are_ good enough to do discovery and a lot of things.

 

Intel _could_ make a "PCI disk controller interface definition", and it will work. The way USB does actually work, and UHCI was actually a fair standard, even if it left _way_ too much to software.

 

Source code. LinuxBIOS works today, and is a lot more flexible than EFI will _ever_ be.

Compatibility. Make hardware that works with old drivers and old BIOSes. This works. The fact that Intel forgot about that with ia-64 is not an excuse to make _more_ mistakes.

Don't screw this up. EFI is not going in the right direction.

 

http://www.kernel-traffic.org/kernel-traff...0030910_231.xml

 

There is actually a lot more interesting stuff in there, including Intel engineering itself defending EFI, but not much more on ACPI and way too much too post.

Edited by bofors
×
×
  • Create New...