On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 06:55:49PM -0500, Youquan,Song wrote: > On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 03:27:27PM +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 01:14:42PM -0500, Youquan,Song wrote: > > > On Nehalem-EX, CPU C3 is mapped to ACPI C3, but C-states information in /proc > > > and /sys are conflicting with ACPI C2 mapping and confused user. > > > > Well, isn't the "type" only losely related to the C-state number anyway, if > > you have more than 3 states? > > That's true, if CPU has more 3 states such as C3, C6, C7, there are > all mapped to ACPI C3. But the current situation is that if platform > does NOT support ACPI C2, the user interface /sys show us ACPI C2 is > supported which actual is ACPI C3. > > As you know, ACPI C3 and ACPI C2 have much different, such as: BUS SNOOP > or not, ACPI C3 has better power saving etc. we should not mix them. Yes, but what happens if there are two states of type C2? The whole concept of "type C<number>" and "state C<number>" was broken from the beginning... Best, Dominik -- 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
