Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 09:44:08 -0700 From: Sean Bruno <seanbru@yahoo-inc.com> To: "sbruno@freebsd.org" <sbruno@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" <freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [CFT] Sparse Cstate Support -- Its possible, that I don't know what I'm doing. Message-ID: <1340210648.2858.9.camel@powernoodle.corp.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1340121728.5203.8.camel@powernoodle> References: <1340121728.5203.8.camel@powernoodle>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 09:02 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote: > http://people.freebsd.org/~sbruno/acpi_cpu_cstate_sparse.txt also, I wanted to point out that I'm returning BUS_PROBE_GENERIC here. I want to emulate the Intel acpi_idle code that exists in linux-land and I *thought* that I could setup an acpi_cpu_idle module that would come in at a higher priority on Intel cpus, however there's some SYSINIT() hackery going on that I don't know how to handle gracefully. I'm not sure how to proceed with a different idle module here. thoughts? e.g. static void acpi_cpu_postattach(void *unused __unused) { device_t *devices; int err; int i, n; err = devclass_get_devices(acpi_cpu_devclass, &devices, &n); if (err != 0) { printf("devclass_get_devices(acpi_cpu_devclass) failed\n"); return; } for (i = 0; i < n; i++) bus_generic_probe(devices[i]); for (i = 0; i < n; i++) bus_generic_attach(devices[i]); free(devices, M_TEMP); } SYSINIT(acpi_cpu, SI_SUB_CONFIGURE, SI_ORDER_MIDDLE, acpi_cpu_postattach, NULL);
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1340210648.2858.9.camel>