From owner-freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 22 07:30:31 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492411065670; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:30:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C1AC8FC12; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:30:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.100]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id KAA17487; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:30:26 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD)) id 1ShyK2-000MYq-88; Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:30:26 +0300 Message-ID: <4FE41F11.4080601@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:30:25 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120613 Thunderbird/13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sean Bruno References: <1340121728.5203.8.camel@powernoodle> <4FE0EA24.6000906@FreeBSD.org> <1340142162.3201.12.camel@powernoodle.corp.yahoo.com> <4FE158FF.5070209@FreeBSD.org> <1340208849.2858.2.camel@powernoodle.corp.yahoo.com> <4FE23004.3080609@FreeBSD.org> <1340225679.2858.26.camel@powernoodle.corp.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1340225679.2858.26.camel@powernoodle.corp.yahoo.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "sbruno@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: [CFT] Sparse Cstate Support -- Its possible, that I don't know what I'm doing. X-BeenThere: freebsd-acpi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: ACPI and power management development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:30:31 -0000 on 20/06/2012 23:54 Sean Bruno said the following: > On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 13:18 -0700, Andriy Gapon wrote: >>> I also, disagree with the idea of "FreeBSD C-states" as that is not >> the >>> intention of the code. The code, from my read, is trying to >> interpret >>> C-states as though they are always defined sequentially and >> non-sparse. >> >> I seem to recall that this is an ACPI requirement. I could be >> mistaken, but no >> time to double-check at the moment. >> >> > > Just to check as I'm actively looking at this code I went and grabbed > the December 6, 2011 ACPI spec. http://www.acpi.info/spec.htm > > chap 8.1 pretty clearly states that C2 and C3 are optional states. So it > appears that you can have a C3 without a C2. So, I suspect that the > idea that the index the cx_states array is always going to be 1 less > that the ACPI Cstate value isn't by spec. Or something ... :-) I think that the chapter on _CST is more relevant here (8.4.2.1 in my copy of the spec). But anyway, there is no such requirement in the specification. I was misremembering the requirement that states should be ordered. So, would you like to produce a cleaned up version of your patch with only this change in it? -- Andriy Gapon