Stefan Reinauer <[email protected]> writes: >> --- a/src/southbridge/intel/i82801gx/smihandler.c >> +++ b/src/southbridge/intel/i82801gx/smihandler.c >> @@ -362,6 +362,9 @@ static void southbridge_smi_apmc(unsigned int node, >> smm_state_save_area_t *state >> /* Emulate B2 register as the FADT / Linux expects it */ >> >> reg8 = inb(APM_CNT); >> + if (mainboard_apm_cnt&& mainboard_apm_cnt(reg8)) >> + return; > > Is it on purpose that the mainboard_apm_cnt function can prevent the > generic 82801gx code (including the not implemented C state > coordination) from running?
Yes, that's intentional. If one mainboard doesn't like the way how the i82801gx handles some APM_CNT, it could say so and does it's own implementation. Most callbacks will probably simply return 0, but's IMHO it's nice to have this option. Sven -- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
