> From: Langsdorf, Mark
>
> I'm not opposed to this on principle.
>
> I'll run some tests today and see if anything noticeably breaks.
>
Found a minor syntax error.
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
-index 1b1920f..6128442 100644
+index 1b1920f..73ce547 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
@@ -56,10 +56,12 @@ MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@
+ case SYSTEM_AMD_MSR_CAPABLE:
+ msr &= AMD_MSR_RANGE;
+ break;
-+ default;
++ default:
Otherwise, I've been running this for 24 hours with no
ill effects on a 4core box. We'll still need more
extensive testing and to resolve the differences
between the Turbo and Boost implementations.
--Mark Langsdorf
Operating System Research Center
AMD
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
