[CFT] Sparse Cstate Support -- Its possible, that I don't know
what I'm doing.
Sean Bruno
seanbru at yahoo-inc.com
Wed Jun 20 23:29:10 UTC 2012
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 09:44 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 09:02 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> > http://people.freebsd.org/~sbruno/acpi_cpu_cstate_sparse.txt
>
> also, I wanted to point out that I'm returning BUS_PROBE_GENERIC here.
>
> I want to emulate the Intel acpi_idle code that exists in linux-land and
> I *thought* that I could setup an acpi_cpu_idle module that would come
> in at a higher priority on Intel cpus, however there's some SYSINIT()
> hackery going on that I don't know how to handle gracefully. I'm not
> sure how to proceed with a different idle module here. thoughts?
>
> e.g.
>
> static void
> acpi_cpu_postattach(void *unused __unused)
> {
> device_t *devices;
> int err;
> int i, n;
>
> err = devclass_get_devices(acpi_cpu_devclass, &devices, &n);
> if (err != 0) {
> printf("devclass_get_devices(acpi_cpu_devclass) failed\n");
> return;
> }
> for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
> bus_generic_probe(devices[i]);
> for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
> bus_generic_attach(devices[i]);
> free(devices, M_TEMP);
> }
>
> SYSINIT(acpi_cpu, SI_SUB_CONFIGURE, SI_ORDER_MIDDLE,
> acpi_cpu_postattach, NULL);
>
>
Ohhhhhh ... right. This entire idea is stupid and fully demonstrates my
lack of understanding. bus_probe/attach can't be used, there's no BUS
here. So, SYSINIT() to the rescue. Ok, that changes things around a
lot for me. This BUS_PROBE_GENERIC idea is a dud.
/me goes back to reading first and typing second
Sean
More information about the freebsd-acpi
mailing list