On Friday, March 29, 2013 06:02:45 PM Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> - /* Run _OSC query for all possible controls. */ > >> - capbuf[OSC_CONTROL_TYPE] = OSC_PCI_CONTROL_MASKS; > >> + /* Run _OSC query only with existing controls. */ > >> + capbuf[OSC_CONTROL_TYPE] = root->osc_control_set; > > > > I suppose we can do that, but then why this should be root->osc_control_set and > > not just 0? > > in case query support and set control are called in mixed sequence. OK, that's a good enough reason I think. I'm kind of afarid of regressions that may result from this, though, so I'm going to queue it up for 3.10. Thanks, Rafael -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center. -- 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
