On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 08:59:15AM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote: > On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 12:26 -0700, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > A patch went into the kernel earlier this year to ignore critical trip > > points that were below 0. > well, I think this patch is wrong. > a critical trip point below 0 Celsius doesn't mean it's invalid. I think it's pretty clear that a critical trip point below 0 celsius means that the critical trip point is invalid, though I agree that ignoring the entire thermal zone as a result is somewhat unfortunate. > windows can work well on this laptop. > please look at: > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10686#c13 > IMO, we need to fix the ACPICA code first of all. > > Ming, what do you think of the patch in comment #15 and #16? We could quibble over the technical correctness of this approach, but it seems to behave in exactly the same way - ie, Linux will ignore the thermal zone? The existing code seems fine, other than the fact that a bad _CRT will result everything failing. I think we'd be better off just losing the return -ENODEV there and try to use as much of the thermal information as we can. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
