From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Singer Subject: Re: Athlon 64 complains of frequency mismatch Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 09:07:41 -0700 Sender: cpufreq-bounces@www.linux.org.uk Message-ID: <20040622160741.GA15216@buici.com> References: <84EA05E2CA77634C82730353CBE3A8431990F7@SAUSEXMB1.amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <84EA05E2CA77634C82730353CBE3A8431990F7@SAUSEXMB1.amd.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org@www.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: paul.devriendt@amd.com Cc: cpufreq@www.linux.org.uk On Tue, Jun 22, 2004 at 08:26:38AM -0700, paul.devriendt@amd.com wrote: > > Perhaps I'm missing something. If AMD advertizes Cool&Quiet as does > > this vendor, MSI, then there has to be someplace where this data is > > given to Windows. Are we talking about the vendor providing a Windows > > driver without including the necessary information in the BIOS? > > The Windows XP driver gets the information from the same place as > the Linux driver ... the ACPI _PSS object. And if there is no _PSS ACPI object(s)? > If Windows is able to find the data but Linux can not, then we have > some sort of bug or spec compliance issue. > > Windows 2000 gets the information from the BIOS PSB table, and the > Linux driver is also capable of using this data (if CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESSOR > is not set, or if ACPI _PSS data can not be found). I take this to mean that I might see the correct data if I disable the ACPI PROCESSOR module. Right?