From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johan Vromans Subject: Re: [PATHC] Relaxed syntax for the processor PBLK length Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:39:40 +0100 Message-ID: References: <41FD3E02.8010701@tremplin-utc.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: In-Reply-To: <41FD3E02.8010701-VkQ1JFuSMpfAbQlEx87xDw@public.gmane.org> (Eric Piel's message of "Sun, 30 Jan 2005 21:05:22 +0100") 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: acpi-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Eric Piel writes: > 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). Wouldn't it be better to correct this in the DSDT itself? -- Johan ------------------------------------------------------- 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