Is this really such a big deal? I don't think that a loaded table is really consuming
much in the way of resources. Sure, it is mapped, but at least some of the internal stuff
is relatively static. Plus, we have to:
1) Add a new external interface which must be documented.
2) Disallow unloading things like DSDT and SSDTs, FADT, FACS.
3) What if a table is used by more than one "module"?
You'll have to convince me that this is worth the trouble.
From: Devel [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Bob Paauwe
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 9:52 AM
Subject: [Devel] [PATCH 2/2] Acutally unload a table.
Instead of simply marking it as unloaded. If a table is dynamically
loaded by a module and the module is then unloaded, the table is no longer
valid so it's best to make sure it is unloaded.
Signed-off-by: Bob Paauwe <bob.j.paauwe(a)intel.com>
drivers/acpi/acpica/tbxfload.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbxfload.c
b/drivers/acpi/acpica/tbxfload.c index aadb300..ce75ca2 100644
@@ -408,6 +408,7 @@ acpi_status acpi_unload_parent_table(acpi_handle
status = acpi_tb_release_owner_id(i);
Devel mailing list