Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 12 Sep 2010 11:30:43 +0300
From:      Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
To:        Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: CPU C-state storange on Panasonic TOUGH BOOK CF-R9
Message-ID:  <4C8C8FB3.9060100@icyb.net.ua>
In-Reply-To: <4C8C8B64.8020907@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <4C8BCAC5.5050008@root.org> <mailpost.1284277196.1767764.83548.mailing.freebsd.current@FreeBSD.cs.nctu.edu.tw> <4C8C8B64.8020907@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 12/09/2010 11:12 Alexander Motin said the following:
> Just an idea. Limits of 100 and 1000 are defined for detection of
> C-states using P_LVLx_LAT registers. Because _CST explicitly specifies
> which states are available, these limitations may not apply there. I
> would try to comment these checks in acpi_cpu_cx_cst() and look what
> happen. At least I haven't found in ACPI 3.0 specification any latency
> limits applied to _CST.

Not 100% sure, but what you said does make sense.
I couldn't also find any such wording in ACPI 4.0 spec.

-- 
Andriy Gapon



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C8C8FB3.9060100>