From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bruno Ducrot Subject: Re: [PATHC] Relaxed syntax for the processor PBLK length Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 15:58:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20050131145836.GA1145@poupinou.org> References: <41FD3E02.8010701@tremplin-utc.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41FD3E02.8010701-VkQ1JFuSMpfAbQlEx87xDw@public.gmane.org> Sender: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: acpi-devel-admin-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: Eric Piel Cc: len.brown-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 30, 2005 at 09:05:22PM +0100, Eric Piel wrote: > Hello, > > In the original DSDT of my laptop (Acer TravelMate 614) the processor > PBLK length is declared to be 5. The legal and only allowed value is 6. > This is an error in the DSDT and actually it is 6. Allowing Linux ACPI > to read also processor PBLK length of 5 works and permits the processor > to have the C-states correctly detected. In turn it allows the processor > to get less hot (so this is eventually useful). > > I've noticed that some other Acer DSDT also have this length > mis-indicated. The attached patch adds some logic to the ACPI to allow a > processor PBLK length of 5 when the syntax is relaxed. > You should consider to disable C3 in this case IMHO. Thanks, -- Bruno Ducrot -- Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? -- Don't know. Don't care. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IntelliVIEW -- Interactive Reporting Tool for open source databases. Create drag-&-drop reports. Save time by over 75%! Publish reports on the web. Export to DOC, XLS, RTF, etc. Download a FREE copy at http://www.intelliview.com/go/osdn_nl