From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jos Delbar Subject: Re: Linux ACPI processor driver patch: user-definable power state limit Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:36:35 +0200 Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Message-ID: <200410101636.35383.jos.delbar@ugent.be> References: <200408071959.10529.jos.delbar@ugent.be> <1097301120.16784.2.camel@d845pe> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1097301120.16784.2.camel@d845pe> Content-Disposition: inline Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Len Brown Cc: ACPI Developers , Robert Moore List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org As Dominik Brodowski pointed out, the module parameter currently exported in this patch should be sufficient. I have the ACPI processor module compiled into my kernel, yet I can still use "processor.acpi_cstate_limit" on the boot line. Do you require a new version of the patch without the "acpi_" prefix? On Saturday 09 October 2004 07:52, you wrote: > Jos, > Can you modify this patch to use a kernel boot parameter > rather than a module load parameter? Some folks don't > load this driver as a module. Also, it gives you the > chance to add a couple of lines to Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt > > thanks, > -Len -- Jos Delbar jos.delbar-Cru1EgDzd7c@public.gmane.org ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl