http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3165
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| |m
Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
------- Comment #19 from [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-18 11:23 -------
[42949374.110000] acpi_processor-0509 [08] processor_get_power_in: ----Entry
[42949374.110000] acpi_processor-0515 [08] processor_get_power_in: ----Exit-
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFED
is here:
ACPI_FUNCTION_TRACE("acpi_processor_get_power_info_fadt");
if (!pr)
return_VALUE(-EINVAL);
if (!pr->pblk)
return_VALUE(-ENODEV);
Looking at the DSDT:
Scope (\_PR)
{
Processor (CPU1, 0x01, 0x00000000, 0x00) {}
}
So it does appear that the PBLK and PBLK-length are 0 --
yet 2.4.18 was able to enable C2 without this...
Please verify that this regression still exists in 2.6.22.stable
I expect it will be. It isn't clear how 2.4 was getting
the C2 address, or why it wasn't also exposing C3, for that matter.
--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
acpi-bugzilla mailing list
acpi-bugzilla@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acpi-bugzilla
