On 10/28/2013 05:05 PM, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
W dniu 10/24/13 15:23, al.stone@linaro.org pisze:
From: Al Stone ahs3@redhat.com
Make sure we are not in HW reduced mode when we rely on the the P_LVL2_LAT or P_LVL3_LAT (c2_latency, c3_latency) values from the FADT.
Signed-off-by: Al Stone al.stone@linaro.org
drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c index 3cee9a1..3e20b4c 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c @@ -666,7 +666,7 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_power_info(struct acpi_processor *pr) memset(pr->power.states, 0, sizeof(pr->power.states));
result = acpi_processor_get_power_info_cst(pr);
- if (result == -ENODEV)
if (!acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware && (result == -ENODEV)) result = acpi_processor_get_power_info_fadt(pr);
if (result)
Correct me if I'm wrong but I think this patch would not be necessary if we would apply [PATCH 10/13] from this series.
Tomasz
I think it's still needed. Regardless of whether or not the _CST exists and parses properly, we should never get PM info from the FADT in reduced HW mode. Adding the test protects us from faulty _CST data in reduced HW mode.