Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2006 01:11:40 +0900 From: Hiroharu Tamaru <tamaru@myn.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp> To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Cc: Nate Lawson <njl@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Is hw.pci.do_powerstate expected to be casually tuned? Message-ID: <sa6mzeyr8eb.wl%tamaru@myn.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp> In-Reply-To: <sa6odzerd1t.wl%tamaru@myn.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp> References: <sa6odzerd1t.wl%tamaru@myn.rcast.u-tokyo.ac.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I think I spoke too early... OK. I retried RELENG_6 kernel and learned that $FreeBSD: src/sys/dev/pci/pci.c,v 1.298 2005/09/21 19:47:00 imp Exp $ and a subsequent MFC $FreeBSD: src/sys/dev/pci/pci.c,v 1.292.2.3 2005/09/27 05:57:47 imp Exp $ has split hw.pci.do_powerstate=1 into hw.pci.do_power_resume=1 hw.pci.do_power_nodriver=0 FIVA 206VL needs hw.pci.do_power_resume=0, while do_power_nodriver can be > 0. So I'm now seeing that these are in fact expected to be tuned by an user depending on their hardware. ;-) Maybe, a better question would then be... Would it make sense to force do_power_resume = 0 when doing a S4BIOS? Is the current behavior tested on any other S4BIOS capable machine? Thanks, always. -- Hiroharu Tamaru
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?sa6mzeyr8eb.wl%tamaru>