On Saturday, November 09, 2013 06:36:20 PM al.stone@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Al Stone <ahs3@xxxxxxxxxx> -ENOCHANGELOG > Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c | 9 ++++++--- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > index e2bd0bf..262b84b 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_idle.c > @@ -290,7 +290,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_power_info_fadt(struct acpi_processor *pr) > * Check for P_LVL2_UP flag before entering C2 and above on > * an SMP system. > */ > - if ((num_online_cpus() > 1) && > + if (!acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware && > + (num_online_cpus() > 1) && > !(acpi_gbl_FADT.flags & ACPI_FADT_C2_MP_SUPPORTED)) > return -ENODEV; > #endif Patch [8/12] added code to avoid calling this function for acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware set at all, so isn't the check added here actually useless? > @@ -965,7 +966,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_cx(struct acpi_processor *pr, > continue; > > #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU > - if ((cx->type != ACPI_STATE_C1) && (num_online_cpus() > 1) && > + if (!acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware && > + (cx->type != ACPI_STATE_C1) && (num_online_cpus() > 1) && > !pr->flags.has_cst && > !(acpi_gbl_FADT.flags & ACPI_FADT_C2_MP_SUPPORTED)) > continue; > @@ -1020,7 +1022,8 @@ static int acpi_processor_setup_cpuidle_states(struct acpi_processor *pr) > continue; > > #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU > - if ((cx->type != ACPI_STATE_C1) && (num_online_cpus() > 1) && > + if (!acpi_gbl_reduced_hardware && > + (cx->type != ACPI_STATE_C1) && (num_online_cpus() > 1) && > !pr->flags.has_cst && > !(acpi_gbl_FADT.flags & ACPI_FADT_C2_MP_SUPPORTED)) > continue; > -- 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
