Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:14:34 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Cc: Vitaly Magerya <vmagerya@gmail.com>, Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: (Missing) power states of an Atom N455-based netbook Message-ID: <201106281514.36324.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4E09BADF.7050702@FreeBSD.org> References: <BANLkTim%2B1UwquMJ32WP8wZBGkYxPv78MLA@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikmVUtLyANBSqYb%2BL-xkwQ4Zo51Eg@mail.gmail.com> <4E09BADF.7050702@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 28 June 2011 07:28 am, Andriy Gapon wrote: > I think that part (but not all) of the differences between FreeBSD > and Linux can be explained by the fact that FreeBSD currently > doesn't advertise itself as featuring ACPI_CAP_SMP_C1_NATIVE and > ACPI_CAP_SMP_C3_NATIVE. I am not sure what it would take to > actually support these features. I think that Linux does support > (or at least advertise support) for these features. Yes, Linux supports this Intel-specific feature. I think it shouldn't be too hard for us, however. We just have to add support for Intel-specific _CST FFH (Functional Fixed Hardware) in sys/dev/acpica/acpi_cpu.c. You can find more information from "Intel Processor Vendor-Specific ACPI" (order number 302223-005) on Intel website. Also, arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cstate.c of Linux source may help. I believe Linux actually supports all Intel-specific FFHs, BTW. Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201106281514.36324.jkim>