Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2012 23:36:55 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: improve cx_lowest logic Message-ID: <5047B7E7.5080802@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1ts=%2BRmyL5LkNMxaaanr2ffgnSXweakSaByACFhVjdAhA@mail.gmail.com> References: <4FF95F79.30309@FreeBSD.org> <1341935370.4493.4.camel@powernoodle> <4FFFD891.2060109@FreeBSD.org> <CAL409Kye_8t6pG3_XxeQrEt5Oe2Mqd9Verxc6167f=eg3EcCng@mail.gmail.com> <5046F105.80706@FreeBSD.org> <CAN6yY1uq%2BzRWyBNEpsdRAKE-vq9JoFd-0YVQsB-U%2BN6POOyGJA@mail.gmail.com> <504779D8.4030909@FreeBSD.org> <CAN6yY1uE%2BCyHBnGwBpiur1hrKz3ZEfg1eku=i8_1diZYhPzXcw@mail.gmail.com> <50477E9F.7030604@FreeBSD.org> <CAN6yY1ts=%2BRmyL5LkNMxaaanr2ffgnSXweakSaByACFhVjdAhA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 05/09/2012 20:41 Kevin Oberman said the following: > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> wrote: >> on 05/09/2012 19:23 Kevin Oberman said the following: >>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> wrote: >>>> on 05/09/2012 18:17 Kevin Oberman said the following: >>>>> Thanks so much! This should finally make Cx states work on my >>>>> ThinkPad! I really appreciate it. Guess it's time to do my weekly >>>>> upgrade of this system. >>>> >>>> I haven't sneaked in that other commit :-( >>> >>> Oops! :-( >>> >>> Oh, well. At least it should make it to /base/stable/9 soon. Right??? >>> (I only run release/ or releng/ or for an occasional test.) >>> >> >> It's already in stable/9 :) > > Ahh! I now see C3/109, but I see some strange behavior. When on AC > power, only C1/1 and C2/104 are available, but cx_lowest is C3, even > though C3 is not available. If I switch to battery, C1/1, C2/80 and > C3/109 are available (???), but cx_lowest is set to C2. I find the Cx > value sets a bit odd, but the setting of cx_lowest appears to be a > bug, at least to me. I can manually set cx_lowest to C3 and I actually > use C3. > > My suspicion is that there is either a race or a logic issue where > x_lowest is reset to the lowest value before the available Cx values > are set, so cx_lowest is always set the the lowest Cx state from the > previous power configuration. (This is a guess, but it fits what I am > seeing very well.) > Hmm, this looks like the older behavior. What revision are you at? Also, any local ACPI-related patches? -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5047B7E7.5080802>