From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun 28 19:14:49 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 278701065670;
	Tue, 28 Jun 2011 19:14:49 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:14:34 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <BANLkTim+1UwquMJ32WP8wZBGkYxPv78MLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikmVUtLyANBSqYb+L-xkwQ4Zo51Eg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E09BADF.7050702@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <4E09BADF.7050702@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201106281514.36324.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: Vitaly Magerya <vmagerya@gmail.com>, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: (Missing) power states of an Atom N455-based netbook
X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: ACPI and power management development <freebsd-acpi.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-acpi>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-acpi>,
	<mailto:freebsd-acpi-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 19:14:49 -0000

On Tuesday 28 June 2011 07:28 am, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> I think that part (but not all) of the differences between FreeBSD
> and Linux can be explained by the fact that FreeBSD currently
> doesn't advertise itself as featuring ACPI_CAP_SMP_C1_NATIVE and
> ACPI_CAP_SMP_C3_NATIVE.  I am not sure what it would take to
> actually support these features.  I think that Linux does support
> (or at least advertise support) for these features.

Yes, Linux supports this Intel-specific feature.  I think it shouldn't 
be too hard for us, however.  We just have to add support for 
Intel-specific _CST FFH (Functional Fixed Hardware) in 
sys/dev/acpica/acpi_cpu.c.  You can find more information from "Intel 
Processor Vendor-Specific ACPI" (order number 302223-005) on Intel 
website.  Also, arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cstate.c of Linux source may 
help.  I believe Linux actually supports all Intel-specific FFHs, 
BTW.

Jung-uk Kim