On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > 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. Ok, Thanks -- 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
