Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 17:40:47 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org, Vitaly Magerya <vmagerya@gmail.com> Subject: Re: (Missing) power states of an Atom N455-based netbook Message-ID: <201106281740.49247.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4E0A470F.6090503@FreeBSD.org> References: <BANLkTim%2B1UwquMJ32WP8wZBGkYxPv78MLA@mail.gmail.com> <201106281514.36324.jkim@FreeBSD.org> <4E0A470F.6090503@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 28 June 2011 05:26 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 28/06/2011 22:14 Jung-uk Kim said the following: > > 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. > > Once upon a time there was a patch proposed for FreeBSD: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.os.freebsd.current/127860/focus=6372 > Unfortunately I have never really evaluated it. Hmm, interesting patch. I think he is in the right direction. Thanks for sharing, Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201106281740.49247.jkim>