[CFT] Sparse Cstate Support -- Its possible, that I don't know what I'm doing.

[Andriy Gapon]

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