Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:24:12 -0700
From: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@us.ibm.com>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Cc: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>,
       linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] acpi: Fix regression where _PPC is not read at boot
	even when ignore_ppc=0
Message-ID: <20090428202409.GU7917@plum>
Reply-To: djwong@us.ibm.com
References: <20090415225348.GW8311@plum> <20090416002712.GX8311@plum> <200904161201.13409.trenn@suse.de> <20090416174217.GY8311@plum> <20090416224507.GA31984@srcf.ucam.org> <20090428193303.GC6968@plum> <20090428195348.GA8376@srcf.ucam.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090428195348.GA8376@srcf.ucam.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 910
Lines: 22

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 08:53:48PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:33:04PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:45:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > 
> > > That's not really an option. It works with Windows.
> > 
> > Who verified that?  Does anyone know what strategy Windows uses to avoid this
> > T60 problem?  
> 
> The best guess was that Windows only evaluates _PPC when it receives a 
> notification.

I have asked the Windows side of the UEFI development team here about what
they've observed about Windows' behavior regarding reading _PPC at boot and
will post their answers when I receive them.

--D
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/