From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Starikovskiy Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] acpi-cpufreq: merge acpi functionality of cpufreq drivers Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 20:28:28 +0400 Message-ID: <44D2242C.7050501@linux.intel.com> References: <44CE4F8A.5060600@linux.intel.com> <20060802092733.GI17014@poupinou.org> <44D0F292.8090403@linux.intel.com> <20060803161130.GL17014@poupinou.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060803161130.GL17014@poupinou.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Bruno Ducrot Cc: cpufreq@lists.linux.org.uk, Dave Jones Bruno Ducrot wrote: > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 10:44:34PM +0400, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: >> Bruno Ducrot wrote: >>> I've not checked carrefully but it seems to me you are breaking >>> powernow-k8. >> We do not touch powernow-k8, and tried to make sure we do not change >> acpi-cpufreq to exclude any unknown hardware. What we tried to do, is to merge >> different ways of accessing cpufreq with ACPI under single driver. Could you be >> more specific how we break powernow-k8? > > I haven't seen the if (!check_speedstep_cpu(cpu)) {...} onto > apci_cpufreq_cpu_init_acpi() indeed. > > Therefore you are correct. > > But it's funny to see that how acpi_cpufreq driver become > so Intel specific. > > If AMD or any other vendors want to add their stuff > onto acpi_cpufreq, then should we accept their patches > as well? > I think so, it is written to handle that with minor modifications.