Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 17 May 2007 17:40:31 -0400 | From | Ed Sweetman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] powernow-k8: depend on acpi-processor for SMP systems |
| |
Ed Sweetman wrote: > Dave Jones wrote: >> On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 02:13:42PM -0400, Len Brown wrote: >> >> > > Index: linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/Kconfig >> > > =================================================================== >> > > --- linux.orig/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/Kconfig >> > > +++ linux/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/Kconfig >> > > @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ config X86_POWERNOW_K7_ACPI >> > > config X86_POWERNOW_K8 >> > > tristate "AMD Opteron/Athlon64 PowerNow!" >> > > select CPU_FREQ_TABLE >> > > + select ACPI_PROCESSOR if SMP >> > > depends on EXPERIMENTAL >> > > help >> > > This adds the CPUFreq driver for mobile AMD >> Opteron/Athlon64 processors. >> > > Unfortunately this patch will not actually enable >> ACPI_PROCESSOR in >> > the SMP=y ACPI=n case. "select" doesn't work for targets that >> > have dependencies. >> >> I don't think we can fix this perfectly tbh, but the above at >> least gets us close for the majority of users. >> >> Are there many x86-64 users that don't enable acpi ? >> >> Dave >> >> > I've just always compiled acpi_processor in, it's only logical that if > you are using a power management feature, that you compile in the > power management interface, and if your stuff deals directly with the > cpu, you may want to compile the acpi_processor driver in. The only > reason I knew to do that though, was because i go through each > option. Someone else looking to just enable cpufreq, would skip the > sub-drivers of ACPI, and never know better. We dont suggest anywhere > in the cpufreq driver, we dont mention restrictions or limits of the > driver without acpi, and we certainly dont select it or make it > dependent (except silently and invisibly to the user). > Every other cpufreq driver demands acpi. In windows you have to have > acpi, the p states are called acpi p states everywhere. The problem > here is that the author to the powernow_k8 driver found a way to get > some cpufreq functionality without acpi. > So to make everyone happy, maybe we should have the silently > selected/deselected driver exposed to the user, as a sub-driver. > -> Powernow K8 / athlon64 cpufreq driver y/m/n > -------> ACPI support y/m/n >
Here's a patch
--- ./linux-backup/arch/x86_64/kernel/cpufreq/Kconfig 2007-02-04 13:44:54.000000000 -0500 +++ ./linux-2.6.21-rc5-mm2/arch/x86_64/kernel/cpufreq/Kconfig 2007-05-17 17:37:24.000000000 -0400 @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ comment "CPUFreq processor drivers" -config X86_POWERNOW_K8 +config X86_POWERNOW_K8 tristate "AMD Opteron/Athlon64 PowerNow!" select CPU_FREQ_TABLE help @@ -21,10 +21,10 @@ If in doubt, say N. config X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI - bool + tristate "ACPI support" depends on X86_POWERNOW_K8 && ACPI_PROCESSOR depends on !(X86_POWERNOW_K8 = y && ACPI_PROCESSOR = m) - default y + config X86_SPEEDSTEP_CENTRINO tristate "Intel Enhanced SpeedStep (deprecated)" | |