[CFT] Sparse Cstate Support -- Its possible, that I don't know
what I'm doing.
Andriy Gapon
avg at FreeBSD.org
Wed Jun 20 20:18:27 UTC 2012
on 20/06/2012 19:14 Sean Bruno said the following:
> Since this patch changes the output of the sysctl format, I disagree
> with it.
And I am not proposing it for the tree.
> I also, disagree with the idea of "FreeBSD C-states" as that is not the
> intention of the code. The code, from my read, is trying to interpret
> C-states as though they are always defined sequentially and non-sparse.
I seem to recall that this is an ACPI requirement. I could be mistaken, but no
time to double-check at the moment.
> I am still of the opinion that my patch is correct at this point.
--
Andriy Gapon
More information about the freebsd-acpi
mailing list