Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 12:14:55 -0500 From: "Stephane E. Potvin" <sepotvin@videotron.ca> To: Adam McDougall <mcdouga9@egr.msu.edu> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cpufreq est and Enhanced Sleep (Cx) States for Intel Core and above Message-ID: <4580350F.8080904@videotron.ca> In-Reply-To: <20061213003744.GP18799@egr.msu.edu> References: <20061210002923.GO81923@egr.msu.edu> <20061213003744.GP18799@egr.msu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Adam McDougall wrote: > On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 07:29:23PM -0500, Adam McDougall wrote: > > src/sys/i386/cpufreq/est.c has many Pentium M cpus but nothing > from the Intel Core and Core 2 families that I can see. I tried > looking up the values myself, but could not find them in: > http://www.intel.com/design/mobile/datashts/314078.htm > > It seems that even the latest version of the Linux kernel does not > list values for at least Yonah (Core 2). Is it a big mystery, or is > this data actually available somewhere? I have a Core 2 Duo > T7600 in my laptop and est won't touch my cpu because it doesn't > recognize it. I did get it to use some other form of speed control > by putting hint.acpi_perf.0.disabled="1" in /boot/loader.conf according > to another post. > > Another thing I wish could work is the Enhanced cpu Sleep States; > this Dell Latitude D820 laptop only sees C1 although the document > above indicates it should probably support 4 unique states. Is > there a way I can debug and/or fix this? I can post dumps of the > acpi stuff and/or verbose boot logs if it would be helpful. > > Thanks > _______________________________________________ > > I am attaching my asl and dsdt acpi dumps incase someone knows for > something to look for as for why it thinks I only have C1, unless > its related to the speed control problem above. > Hi Adam, It's only finding the C1 state for various reasons that you'll find described in some details in the following email that I send to the acpi mailing list in June this year. The major reason being that the acpi cpu driver does not support well multiprocessor systems. http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=116103+0+archive/2006/freebsd-acpi/20060611.freebsd-acpi The email also included a patch to add support for multiprocessor systems to the acpi cpu driver. I've not updated the patch since then so it might or might not apply cleanly to a recent current. Steph
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4580350F.8080904>