On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 07:02 +0800, Thomas Renninger wrote:
> On Sunday 21 February 2010 03:51:22 am Zhang Rui wrote:
> ...
> > > @@ -379,17 +379,19 @@ static int acpi_thermal_trips_update(struct
> > > acpi_thermal *tz, int flag) * Below zero (Celsius) values clearly aren't
> > > right for sure.. * ... so lets discard those as invalid.
> > > */
> > > - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) ||
> > > - tz->trips.critical.temperature <= 2732) {
> > > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> > > + tz->trips.critical.flags.valid = 0;
> > > + ACPI_DEBUG_PRINT((ACPI_DB_INFO,
> > > + "No critical threshold\n"));
> >
> > No critical threshold is also a violation of ACPI spec.
> > what about using FW_BUG here as well?
>
> Could you point me to where this is stated, please.
> I only found Chapter 11.5 (ver. 3.0b):
> Thermal Zone Interface Requirements:
> A thermal zone must contain at least one trip point
> (critical, near critical, active, or passive)
>
> If at another place they state that a critical trip point is
> required, this would contradict with each other.
>
you're right.
I thought I saw such statements somewhere in the ACPI spec but
apparently I'm wrong. Sorry for the noise.
Acked-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> Thanks,
>
> Thomas
> --
> 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
--
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
