Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:10:02 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: Alexander Best <alexbestms@math.uni-muenster.de>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org Subject: Re: estX still not attaching properly Message-ID: <4A3B720A.8040601@icyb.net.ua> In-Reply-To: <200906180909.33511.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <permail-20090617182925f0889e8400003062-a_best01@message-id.uni-muenster.de> <200906180909.33511.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 18/06/2009 16:09 John Baldwin said the following: > On Wednesday 17 June 2009 2:29:25 pm Alexander Best wrote: >> hi there, >> >> although i'm running a very recent current which has "ACPICA 20090521", estX >> still isn't attaching properly on my machine: >> >> est0: <Enhanced SpeedStep Frequency Control> on cpu0 >> est: CPU supports Enhanced Speedstep, but is not recognized. >> est: cpu_vendor GenuineIntel, msr 925092506000925 >> device_attach: est0 attach returned 6 >> est1: <Enhanced SpeedStep Frequency Control> on cpu1 >> est: CPU supports Enhanced Speedstep, but is not recognized. >> est: cpu_vendor GenuineIntel, msr 925092506000925 >> device_attach: est1 attach returned 6 > > That just means ACPI isn't providing info about the speed steppings your CPU > provides. It is odd that cpu0 has freq_levels but cpu1 does not. > This is most probably not related to the issue at hand. But I have some (probably unfounded) suspicions about OS features that we advertise via _PDC. Also, I find the following interesting in acpi_cpu.c. First we call _PDC, then we call _OSC and then there is the following comment between the two calls: /* * On some systems we need to evaluate _OSC so that the ASL * loads the _PSS and/or _PDC methods at runtime. ... -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A3B720A.8040601>