[PATCH] correct slow acpi_pm rating

1ff100d7 · john stultz <[email protected]> · 2007-03-26 21:32:19 -08:00

On Bob's machine clocksource is selecting PIT over the ACPI PM timer,
because he has the PIIX4 bug.  That bug drops the ACPI PM timers rating
to the same as the PIT, so that's why you're getting the PIT.

Realistically, the PIT is much slower then even the triple read ACPI PM,
so the de-ranking code is probably dropping it too far.

So don't drop ACPI PM quite so low if we see the PIIX4 bug.

Signed-off-by: John Stultz <[email protected]>
Cc: Bob Tracy <[email protected]>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

Commit: 1ff100d76ff76477a2ead3aac94d04f2e891f44e
Parents: d340d890

Changes

1 files changed · +1 −1

File	Status	Add	Del	Content
drivers/clocksource/acpi_pm.c	modified	+1	−1	View file

drivers/clocksource/acpi_pm.c

View file

diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/acpi_pm.c b/drivers/clocksource/acpi_pm.c
index d42060e..5ac309e 100644
--- a/drivers/clocksource/acpi_pm.c
+++ b/drivers/clocksource/acpi_pm.c
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ __setup("acpi_pm_good", acpi_pm_good_setup);
 static inline void acpi_pm_need_workaround(void)
 {
 	clocksource_acpi_pm.read = acpi_pm_read_slow;
-	clocksource_acpi_pm.rating = 110;
+	clocksource_acpi_pm.rating = 120;
 }
 
 /*