ACPI-Patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1

ACPI-Patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1

[Hanno Böck]

I tried to apply the acpi-patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1.

It is not perfect, there are some problems with cpufreq i couldn't fix. If you disable cpufreq, it should compile and run.

If anyone fixes the cpufreq-issue, please inform me.

Patch is available at
http://www.gentoo.org/~hanno/acpi-20021002-2.4.20-pre10-ac1.diff.bz2


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: ACPI-Patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1

[Alan Cox]

On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 17:34, Hanno Böck wrote:
> I tried to apply the acpi-patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1.
> 
> It is not perfect, there are some problems with cpufreq i couldn't fix. If you disable cpufreq, it should compile and run.
> 
> If anyone fixes the cpufreq-issue, please inform me.

You don't want to mix the two. If you do need native power management on
your ACPI system the ACPI layer eventually has to be the one making the
cpufreq requests



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: ACPI-Patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1

[Aaron Gaudio]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1566 bytes --]

I use acpi and cpufreq on my Vaio r505 laptop. ACPI does not
seem to be able to do cpu throttling on the system (it's a Pentium
III-M if anyone's interested), but the modules for cpufreq handles
it well (except when it first loads during boot it seems to be
getting odd numbers in the proc files).

These statements are based on an earlier pre-patch than pre10 though.

Behold, Alan Cox <alan-qBU/x9rampVanCEyBjwyrvXRex20P6io@public.gmane.org> hath decreed:
> On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 17:34, Hanno Böck wrote:
> > I tried to apply the acpi-patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1.
> > 
> > It is not perfect, there are some problems with cpufreq i couldn't fix. If you disable cpufreq, it should compile and run.
> > 
> > If anyone fixes the cpufreq-issue, please inform me.
> 
> You don't want to mix the two. If you do need native power management on
> your ACPI system the ACPI layer eventually has to be the one making the
> cpufreq requests
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> Acpi-devel mailing list
> Acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acpi-devel

-- 

                              Aaron Gaudio
                   prothontar at tarnation.dyndns.org
                    http://prothonotarium.dyndns.org

   "From fullness, aspect. From aspect, being. From being, emptiness."
  

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: ACPI-Patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1

[Alan Cox]

On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 23:57, Aaron Gaudio wrote:
> I use acpi and cpufreq on my Vaio r505 laptop. ACPI does not
> seem to be able to do cpu throttling on the system (it's a Pentium
> III-M if anyone's interested), but the modules for cpufreq handles
> it well (except when it first loads during boot it seems to be
> getting odd numbers in the proc files).

If the ACPI code for that laptop doesn't know how to handle it (or its
expecting native power management) then all should work ok. If the ACPI
code is also doing power management it might not pan out as beautifully
as we would like



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: Re: ACPI-Patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1

[Andrew Kohlsmith]

> Yes, but in a real world this seems to be a common case. On my Sharp
> Mebius PC-MT1-H5 ACPI does not handle CPU power management. I use the
> 'speedstep' utility to adjust clock speed.

My Compaq Evo N160N has no throttling support through ACPI, but I can cut the 
speed to 700MHz (from 1GHz) through /proc/acpi/processor/CPU0/performance.

Regards,
Andrew


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf

Re: ACPI-Patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1

[Ducrot Bruno]

Hi Alan,

On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 10:46:23PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-10-11 at 17:34, Hanno Böck wrote:
> > I tried to apply the acpi-patch against 2.4.20-pre10-ac1.
> > 
> > It is not perfect, there are some problems with cpufreq i couldn't fix. If you disable cpufreq, it should compile and run.
> > 
> > If anyone fixes the cpufreq-issue, please inform me.
> 
> You don't want to mix the two. If you do need native power management on
> your ACPI system the ACPI layer eventually has to be the one making the
> cpufreq requests

You _do_ want to mix the two when ACPI didn't have the right
information in order to support performance states of the cpu (old
version of the specs where performance is not included in AML).

Please note also that Dominik have submitted some patches to have
the two in order to cooporate more smoothly, and Andy is agreed to
go, when things would stabilize.

Cheers,

-- 
Ducrot Bruno
http://www.poupinou.org        Page profaissionelle
http://toto.tu-me-saoules.com  Haume page


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf